10000 votes against Morale

[DeletedUser]

those screenshots are worst case scenarios, in most cases the defender won't have a level 25 farm, level 25 wall and city guard researched and the attacker won't get -30 luck in addition to the morale.

I realize that, but I'm of the opinion it should never be that lopsided under ANY circumstances...

 

[DeletedUser]

sure it should. How fair is it to players who have 4000 player points and another player comes along who has 80,000 points. how is the one person who has 4000 points ever going to stand up in ANY way against a player that much larger than them.

the morale doesnt come into play AT ALL! until you hit a certain mark above the player your attacking. so if you have a 10K city and attack a 3K city you get no morale penalty.

yes this is player vs player and not city vs city.

There are 3 problems here I think....

1. Players dont know about that or the level which it kicks in (5x less points by the way before it starts to penalize). When it does kick in its minimal at the start not the worst case or even med case scenerios that people here are talking about. Sure if I had 100,000 points and hit a 2000 point city I will defo max out the morale penalty.. but you get my drift here.

2. Grepolis doesnt tell me what to say or what to back up. I do that on my own and am not a puppet. I am a forum mod. As such I really couldnt care less what they do in the game so long as it doesnt interfere with me too highly as a player. If you dont believe this then really I dont care so pointing this out is pointless.

3. Alot of the people in here are looking at what comments are made by staff and trying to pick out any little tidbit they figure they can try and argue against.. not to help out the cause of morale but to make themselves feel better about themselves. Dudes you need to get out more. if you want to make valid points I am willing to debate stuff but if your going to point something out that isnt the main point of my post then there is no point in replying to you

The only info I was able to get on this is that you have to be 5x larger than the player who your fighting at this time (they are thinking of increasing that range but nothing is concrete). The higher after this minimum size difference the more of a morale penalty you get. If you want to know why then read the start of my post again and think really hard.

 

[DeletedUser2795]

Okay, just to keep my arguing consistent, I will only argue that morale is bad, not that the mods are wrong. It is true that morale does not kick in for a while, but once it does, I imagine that you do start getting 20k players trying to farm 1k players who have been farmed every week or so (a 20k player might not remember to farm every single farm of theirs) and are trying to build their defense, maybe with a bit of support, then you get this type of situation. and even if the difference is only 10%, 10% is a lot, even if you do not think that it is

 

[DeletedUser]

sure it should. How fair is it to players who have 4000 player points and another player comes along who has 80,000 points. how is the one person who has 4000 points ever going to stand up in ANY way against a player that much larger than them.

The player with 80k will kill the person with 4k.

Did you get conquered?
Did they take everything? Don't worry, in Grepolis this does not mean the end for you. If your city should be conquered you can start again and use the lessons you have learned to avoid any mistakes you may of made previously. Naturally we understand you would wish to remain with your original Alliance. Your new city will be placed in a position where the other players around you are of a similar game level to yourself and with the knowledge you have gained previously you have the possibility of this time becoming much more successful and powerful.

That 80k player is gonna overwhelm the 4k player in any case...

 

[DeletedUser]

sure it should. How fair is it to players who have 4000 player points and another player comes along who has 80,000 points. how is the one person who has 4000 points ever going to stand up in ANY way against a player that much larger than them.

this is pretty much the only point that was made. Now how is a 4000 point player going to stand against an 80000 point player? simple answer is theyre not. Theyve lost and must now be conquered or become a farm.

1. Grepolis was designed as a wargame with winners and losers. Just look at the conquering system. Wheter its revolt, conquest, whatever the end result is that player b loses his village to player a. If that was his only village he restarts in the rim and in all probability will quit. I just want to highlight again that the game was designed with winners AND losers in mind. There are plenty of game models to choose from where your city cannot be conquered if this game didnt want people losing.

2. The favored argument of everyone. You both start at the same level. Innogames has designed the system so that people who start at the same time start reasonably close togheter. I mean when you start you dont have a 100,000 point neighbor right? You have at most a 200 point one. If you play so badly that you reach the point of 80000 vs. 4000 then you deserve to lose and should start again in another world hopefully youll do better.

3. Why penalize people who put time and effort into the game? On the assumption that some people who are cleared have quit the game why penalize those who have cleared them? The quitter is no longer playing, no longer logs on, so why is he given advantages? I saw a report from toko where he lost 8 catapults to a village that had no troops.

4. there are already plenty of things to favor the defender. You say a 4000 point village cannot fight back? read my guide. Dodge, militia, get an mra to mass bolt for you. Plenty of things you can do.

5. a major complaint, not addressed in your post was also the way this was handled and so far only one moderator legionreturns has admitted that you handled this terribly. You even have grepolis players in the gaming, programming and other related industries who have outright said that they would have been fired if they handled an update this badly.

 

[DeletedUser]

..........

2. The favored argument of everyone. You both start at the same level. Innogames has designed the system so that people who start at the same time start reasonably close togheter. I mean when you start you dont have a 100,000 point neighbor right? You have at most a 200 point one. If you play so badly that you reach the point of 80000 vs. 4000 then you deserve to lose and should start again in another world hopefully youll do better.

.......

This is exactly the thing we are talking about. The game does not take this into account when calculating the morale percentage - but it should!

 

[DeletedUser2795]

I am amazed that we could get all of these prominent people (who are non-mods) in the forums to agree on anything. And that in and of itself is a great feat, but to also get more people to vote even for 'yes' then have voted TOTAL on all of the development discussions combined is just as hard. I am surprised that the devs even let it turn on in Zeta

 

[DeletedUser]

Microsoft: Only the people who dont talk to us like it. You dont count,

I think your amazement has been answered in my skit jkp

 

[DeletedUser2795]

*goes and beats on everyone's doors*
"Sorry, you are only one person..."
"You can not represent the main community..."
"Your ideas are unprofitable..."
"We do not need to listen to you, you are not paying us..."

 

[DeletedUser2595]

This is exactly the thing we are talking about. The game does not take this into account when calculating the morale percentage - but it should!

Well, I know that in some TW worlds morale was calculated as it is here, but then after you had been playing the world for a certain length of time it was decided on that rather than a point difference. So that if two people had played for the same time but had v. different points morale didn't penalise the player with more points. I cant remember what the time cut-off was though...

 

[DeletedUser]

ok lets see who here is smart....

How does the morale system work... at what levels does it kick in?

seems to me that no one knows this and yet everyone still says it sucks

nope i`m not smart--- but then again i`m not working as a mod for a game and think i`m clever by being rude to people who play it---i`ve read a few of your post (even the one about people having a go at mods instead of the game )and basically the reason some people might be having a go at you is because your rude not because your a mod---

 

[DeletedUser]

this is pretty much the only point that was made. Now how is a 4000 point player going to stand against an 80000 point player? simple answer is theyre not. Theyve lost and must now be conquered or become a farm.

1. Grepolis was designed as a wargame with winners and losers. Just look at the conquering system. Wheter its revolt, conquest, whatever the end result is that player b loses his village to player a. If that was his only village he restarts in the rim and in all probability will quit. I just want to highlight again that the game was designed with winners AND losers in mind. There are plenty of game models to choose from where your city cannot be conquered if this game didnt want people losing.

2. The favored argument of everyone. You both start at the same level. Innogames has designed the system so that people who start at the same time start reasonably close togheter. I mean when you start you dont have a 100,000 point neighbor right? You have at most a 200 point one. If you play so badly that you reach the point of 80000 vs. 4000 then you deserve to lose and should start again in another world hopefully youll do better.

3. Why penalize people who put time and effort into the game? On the assumption that some people who are cleared have quit the game why penalize those who have cleared them? The quitter is no longer playing, no longer logs on, so why is he given advantages? I saw a report from toko where he lost 8 catapults to a village that had no troops.

4. there are already plenty of things to favor the defender. You say a 4000 point village cannot fight back? read my guide. Dodge, militia, get an mra to mass bolt for you. Plenty of things you can do.

5. a major complaint, not addressed in your post was also the way this was handled and so far only one moderator legionreturns has admitted that you handled this terribly. You even have grepolis players in the gaming, programming and other related industries who have outright said that they would have been fired if they handled an update this badly.

hear hear!

 

[DeletedUser1405]

Whilst i dont agree with the way some mods are answering they cannot be blamed for the update, you dont shoot the monkey when the organ grinder hits a bad note.
The mods are just our escape mechanism, we are all looking for someone to blame for this huge mistake.
The blame should be laid right at the door of the game devs not the mods..

 

[DeletedUser2795]

Well, if the mods would tell us how to contact the devs...

 

[DeletedUser]

Whilst i dont agree with the way some mods are answering they cannot be blamed for the update, you dont shoot the monkey when the organ grinder hits a bad note.
The mods are just our escape mechanism, we are all looking for someone to blame for this huge mistake.
The blame should be laid right at the door of the game devs not the mods..

1. i agree that mods shouldnt be blamed for the update in general.

2. some mods/ commuunity managers do deserve blame for some of the things that they have said and for the way the update was handled in general. Some specific examples are first players werent told that they would lose all thier troops if they kept them in grey villages after v 1.12 was implemented. Second some of the updates were actually put mere hours before it was implemented and like the revolt system were not adequately explained. (by the community manager at least, players gave it thier best shot).

I also resent thier attitude that players must be the one to fix any game mistakes thru the idea forum else terrible ideas will be implemented and not developers.

3. Give us the email of a developer and well complain to him

 

[DeletedUser]

There will be no contact details provided. If you have a problem you can contact me and only me. That is my duty here. While you might think we do nothing if it wasn't for the team here and their opinions you would still be playing within the morale system.

Morale has now been turned off. It is a world setting and it will be appearing in the future on new worlds. The decision on old worlds will be left in your hands. You will have more information about this tomorrow I hope.

 

[DeletedUser]

I think if there was an option to know the morale before you attack more players would be ok with it! And then the purpose of the developers is still achieved: stop overpowered players from attacking weaker players.
When you hover over an enemy town on the map for example, if morale would be immediately visible that would be cool

 

[DeletedUser]

I think if there was an option to know the morale before you attack more players would be ok with it! And then the purpose of the developers is still achieved: stop overpowered players from attacking weaker players.
When you hover over an enemy town on the map for example, if morale would be immediately visible that would be cool

Not a bad compromise.

 

[DeletedUser]

I think if there was an option to know the morale before you attack more players would be ok with it! And then the purpose of the developers is still achieved: stop overpowered players from attacking weaker players.
When you hover over an enemy town on the map for example, if morale would be immediately visible that would be cool

This doesnt make any sense. People have already figured out how much moral will drop depending on relative size. The problem is morale itself, not its understanding.

 

[DeletedUser]

Ive said this in another thread but ill say it again here with some expansion on the idea.

This is the only game that proposes punishing success and dedication.

Its like having your guns become less accurate in a fps the higher youre ranked.
Or your units starting off with less health in a rtsg the higher you are on the ladder.

There are so many small, simple changes they could make to accomplish what theyre trying to do instead of completely turning the basic goal of all games upside down.

The point of the game is to conquer other peoples cities. By adding morale, they are just making that near impossible. Morale will not save small players from being farmed or conquested. It will however make attacking someone with 40 000 points when you have 80 000 points pointless.

The defender already has a significant advantage in this game. Between 3.7% and 141.9% bonus from a wall, 10% for a tower, powers like Zeus' rage, Sea Storm and Wisdom, free 375 defenders in Milita ontop of the strategy of dodging and support being accumulative where attacks are not.

If this is an attempt to lessen the number of people quitting, its failing. Look at Gamma and the largest alliance there. Serpentine Media have all but quit. Why be the highest ranked players in the game when you cant beat anyone else in the world due to your troops fighting at 20% efficiency ontop of all the above advantages. You guys see those screen shots as worst case scenario and not practical, well they're a reality for alot of players.

Players being conquered and quitting is impossible to stop as its the point of the game. If they want to discourage farming smaller players, most of the keys are already in place (all of the defensive bonuses). The only thing that needs to be added is higher protection in the warehouse. Right now its pointless. You get farmed and protect something like 14% of your resources? An hour or twos production really. If they made early warehouses protect more resources right off the bat and capped it at an understandable ammount to not affect the later game of larger players, then farming small cities would not be worth it, as youll lose more than youll gain.

I know im after saying these things a few times, especially the warehouse suggestion, I just hope people like Zeus will take these into consideration and pass them on.

I will say im impressed that they DO seem to listen. That at the very least, we are given a medium like Zeus to communicate ideas and suggestions as well as our outrage at such a change.