End Game Revamp

Discussion in 'Player's Council /Community Discussion' started by Phidippidies, Nov 22, 2017.

  1. Phidippidies

    Phidippidies Phrourach

    Jan 10, 2014
    This thread will be for discussion specific to a revamp of the end game.
    It's highly unlikely that we'll be able to push through an entire new end game, but if you have any ideas on how to tweak it in any way, you can share those ideas and respond to other players' ideas here.
    Ununennium likes this.
  2. Phidippidies

    Phidippidies Phrourach

    Jan 10, 2014
    Posts from elsewhere in the forum:
  3. Phidippidies

    Phidippidies Phrourach

    Jan 10, 2014
  4. figtree2

    figtree2 Polemarch

    Aug 6, 2012
    The only issue I can see with these proposed prerequisites is that larger alliances will get an unfair advantage as smaller alliances would not be able to keep up. Im just concerned that if there isn't a requirement that the top 50 alliances are at X points, then the game will become unbalanced due to one or two alliances having an advantage.
  5. The Smilodon Fatalis

    The Smilodon Fatalis Strategos

    Jun 6, 2013
    Its already a 2 horse race on most worlds. Unless inno moves the game to one international server. Then I don't see that changing anytime soon.
  6. MacAnailigh

    MacAnailigh Phrourach

    Oct 27, 2011
    (Already posted in "What do you hate about ...")

    Original enquiry: "What single aspect of wonders do you dislike the most?".

    The "World Wonders" age changes the Grepolis world in many ways. This satisfies the original charger of a "single aspect". As to HOW World Wonders changes a world requires a somewhat longer explanation.vor

    Upon entry to the "World Wonders" stage:

    1. Players leave, because they do not like the WW, or do not understand the WW, or their alliance leadership has decided to not pursue WW.
    2. The world changes, as everything is related to resources and favor production, while stacking WW-island alliance members with more biremes that could EVER fit in any Greek or Roman era harbor.
    3. The strongest alliances, along with their clones, using "roll-in,roll-out" techniques for maximized resource and favor production.
    4. The strongest alliance gets the four WW "Victor" and, after some competition, the "Crown" of the world. At this point, many just throw in the towel, and look for a new world.
    5. For those players and alliances not interested in the WW mania, entrance to the World Wonder era foreshadows the end of the world.. When the player count hits 300 (or less), the world closes in 28 days. (Apologies to Sandra Bullock).

    Improvements might include:

    1. Do NOT close invitations and world registration to those worlds entering WW era.
    2. Require alliances to hold World Wonders until world ending. (This will be most interesting!)
    3. Change the requirements for establishing and upgrading World Wonders. The resource demand render the game to a resource management problem, and no longer a game, The favor requirements for a short time "improvement" are unreasonable to the point that many do not attempt "acceleration".
    4. Reduce the impact of "roll-in"/"roll-out", requiring a time period (such as 7 days) for re-joining an alliance.
    5. Offer alternative paths to "winning" a world, not requiring building World Wonders.

    Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?
  7. Djrlol

    Djrlol Phrourach

    Aug 23, 2010
  8. Foo Fighter

    Foo Fighter Phrourach

    Feb 20, 2014
    I've been thinking about this for a long time, recently i came up with something i think might be able to work.

    What is not fun about the Wonders:
    1. Prepping for them
    as basically worlds on the EN servers last about 6, 7 months, after the 4th month the game becomes a sim fest. Colonizing in core, maxing market and temples etc. etc.
    2. The process of building them.
    Basically total sim fest, world stops for 2 to 3 weeks till all the wonders are built, groups with the biggest numbers, most simmers, usually wins.
    3. Maintaining them.
    After an ally gets 7 wonders the world basically ends, they got the win, most players leave, now whats left of the winning alliance has to basically protect their wonders till the world dies so someone else on the world doesn't get a crown they don't deserve. The game becomes who can sim the longest without leaving contest.

    What's fun about the Wonders:
    Busting them
    I don't know a greater satisfaction in this game other than taking wonders, everything about it is fun, when you're doing it, its the most fun you can have on Grep.

    And that's about it, if you ask me...

    So a way to fix this, we need to put the emphasis on attacking and defending.

    What i propose is this:
    Since worlds don't have as many players anymore. I don't see this changing, neither does inno due to their recent "miliking" attempts.
    It's a shame but it's a fact. The game is dying slowly, every world revolves around 4 oceans 44, 45, 54, 55.
    Rim is beginning to be more and more inconsequential.
    What im proposing is a total change of the system:


    When a world meets the requirements like for the Age of wonders, the age of conquerors begins.
    An alliance gets to pick an island somewhere in near the center of the ocean they need to defend from every other group on the server. There is 4 total islands (each for one of the core oceans), if an alliance happens to lose their island (you lose it as soon as one city falls to another alliance) the alliance that took it get to choose one more island in their core. The goal is to control all 4. Once an alliance controls all 4 islands a countdown starts throughout the world that last 7 days. If they keep all 4 islands during that 7 day period, the alliance is named THE CONQUERORS OF THE WORLD. Every member receives a crown, and a countdown starts for the world to end. One crown per world, one dominant winner, one conqueror.

    Prerequisite to pick an island:
    Must control xxx number of cities in one of the oceans 44, 45, 54, 55.
    Explanation: since the world revolves around the core, the biggest groups are in the core, the number of cities has to be one which makes it impossible for another group to be dominant in one ocean. So for example if there is 1000 cities in an ocean, for a group to receive an island they need to control, let's say 800 cities. Only big island cities count, no rocks.

    Location of the island:
    The alliance founder gets to choose where their island will be, it has to be near the center of the ocean.
    Explanation: As it needs to be fair it has to be close, yet far enough. This would be an example as to which islands are viable https://i.gyazo.com/18aeab70093261c2a5a1f2d3212dd160.png

    What if:
    1. What if a core alliance doesn't meet the prerequisite?
    The group with the most cities in their core ocean receives an additional island, to reward them for being smart, and strong enough to secure their own ocean.
    2. What if 1 group controls two oceans?
    They get 2 islands, and get to choose where they want to place them, both in the same center, or one for each center. Same goes if they get control of more islands, they get to place them in any center they want.
    3. What if an alliance meets the prerequisite to get an island, and then starts losing cities in their home ocean bellow the requirement cap?
    They keep the island until they lose it, but they need to remain above the cap for any additional islands.
    4. What if one of the residents of the island leaves the ally?
    They lose their island and it goes to the alliance with the most cities in their home ocean, why? To make the alliance leadership pick and choose the island residents wisely.
    5. What if a player that's on a chosen island goes to VM?
    The city can be attacked while the resident is in VM.
    6. What if a rim alliance takes a city?
    The ally with the most cities in their home ocean receives an additional island.

    Now why i like this system, basically forces groups to fight, removes the second branch or at least makes them a burden to have, as you can choose to have more players but need to keep them small.

    Values and other stuff can still be worked around on, and things can be changed around here and there, but i think this is a good starting point for a change.
    If anyone has further questions i'd be glad to answer them
    DeusVult likes this.
  9. Ries Korin

    Ries Korin Chiliarch

    Jan 16, 2013
    I see several points threading through most of the comments here and from others i know in-game.
    1/ The game mechanics have been changed too much from the original.
    2/ Too much emphasis on gold use.
    3/ The community that point 2 has created is all about attack.
    4/ Grepolis is not a total attack game and is being destroyed because Inno and the new community are trying to make it so.
    5/ Total world player numbers are tanking.
    I realise i'm wizzing in the wind but for me, the gold use and emphasis on attack/events on rotation, are the problem. This is the aspect of the changes to the game that Inno gets the most money from and is probably what wont change. That's great, but it's this aspect that is killing the game off! This means that either Inno drains the last cash it can from the game and then shuts it down when everyone finally gives up on it, or, dial back the profits and get people playing again. 2010 to 2014 were the golden years and new worlds back then could begin with upwards of 35 K players. Nowadays there are like, 2000 players per world and it is usually just a two horse race come the WW era. It's clear that Inno has lost sight of the original concept of Grepolis and is destroying it by trying to morph it into the cash cow they desire. Seems to me they should split the idea into two. Release classic Grepo again and keep it as it was, then create a totally new Grepolis (Grepolis warrior worlds, or some such) that follows the model that they want. Grepolis as it was, was a game that needed a variety of playing styles. The traders, the killers, the defenders, the simmers, the diplo's, the leaders. Without all these an alliance was doomed to fail. An alliance of killers only never got very far. The WW era is fantastic and if this is scrapped will, for me, put the final nail in the coffin of this game.
    So that's my idea. Split Grepolis into two games. Which ever one succeeds, go with that. If they both succeed, even better.
    One other point i would like to see implemented is that only the first alliance to make four wonders get's a crown. Two other alliances get a mention for making the wonders but only the winning team actually gets a crown. A crown should mean something but as it stands, any munter can get one by simply hanging around long enough. Arrant nonsense!
    MahimCFC and dadofwildthang like this.
  10. Foo Fighter

    Foo Fighter Phrourach

    Feb 20, 2014
    But you've always been a simmer (not even a good one), and not much more than that. Not a good attacker, or even defender. As a player you're a non factor as your impact in the world is basically just filling anchor points. Im sorry if you dont like hearing it, but its the truth, and truth hurts.
  11. Ries Korin

    Ries Korin Chiliarch

    Jan 16, 2013
    Hello there Foo. Fantastic response to my post, going straight for the personal attack. Such a master of instant wit and ready repartee you are. Still smarting over Golgi huh
    However, all i can hear is waa ha ha waaaah! Please feel free to continue to post in such a manner and let the community see what an adult baby you truly are.
    Big love and have a brill new year.
    dadofwildthang likes this.
  12. Foo Fighter

    Foo Fighter Phrourach

    Feb 20, 2014
    It wasn't meant as a personal attack, just stated the facts. Are you not a simmer? Prove me wrong :p. As far as golgi, you talking about the world I won right?
  13. Kurb

    Kurb Phrourach

    Apr 28, 2010
    speaking about facts your little noone
  14. Three-Toe-Mutant

    Three-Toe-Mutant Peltast

    Dec 30, 2018
    I believe this phase is the entire problem with Grepolis, the resource push isn't being followed by alliances at all, they meaning the leadership (People in the change of an alliance) seem to think the game needs to be completely modified beyond its original design.

    First of all, the game arrives at the Wonders phase, how it get there is basically your choice, worlds speeds vary regarding the time it takes to get to this phase, world speeds are to be considered when selecting a world to play.

    Second, the intent of this game is to race your alliance to push resources and accelerate the build times with favor from the gods, to the wonder islands all alliances have to do this single event in order to win the game. What happens now isn't at all like that, we will get to that a bit further in the conversation.

    Third, game play isn't really being enforced and rightfully so, if you consider the intent of the players is to win at any cost, change the game rules to suit them and not in alignment with game design you have corruption of the game. This makes the game or end game so freaking boring and not really how such a war game should end. The 4 of 7 crowns wins a world and 7 of 7 crowns wins a crown a crown also. Interesting........

    The old game style was to start the countdown when the 4 of 7 was attained, many years after that was changed to include a fight for the 7 of 7 crown, I saw this as a way to increase revenue rather than to keep to the games original design. I have wrestled the 7 of 7 crown attempt but it lasted way too long and most players just ghosted or quit that world. I think this needs to be modified so as to end the game exactly at the completion of the 7 of 7 crown or revert to the 30 count down like in 2012.

    Now, we play with NAP's (No Attack Pacts) the tactic which was made up by players and was a way to deceive other alliances in knowing or more like NOT knowing whose alliance allies are. The appear on the world maps as red or identified as an enemy - again breach of game protocol.

    Currently I'm in an alliance where we allow our own members to attack themselves to take favor or BP's to grow the Wonders or allow enhancement of resources by upgrading the farms on islands which are occupied - The rule was designed to encourage the attack of enemies or other players to gain or grow. This behavior wasn't originally designed, but was morphed into existence. All my resources are now being sent to another alliance who is actually building wonders and the alliance I belong I an not building any wonders. we are trying to compete or cheat in transferring resources to an alliance I'm no member of. Interesting the will to win at any cost, I would consider this cheating. So my overall experience is to put all my time, resources and effort into some one's win, weird how is that fun but wait there's more! At the end of the game after the wonders badges are all attained by this other alliance they will destroy an alliance themselves and invite players from the alliance who helped them cheat their way to a wain to join and complete the wonder they destroyed to give them (The Alliance enslaved to give all their resources and farmed favor to this alliance in order to circumvent the larger alliances ability to win. just to get a crown badge.

    How can we fix or address this end game cheat?

    Ideas to stop the current cheating Wonders Phase:

    1.) Do not allow any members to send resources to any alliance other then the one they are currently assigned
    2.) Disable favor farming during the Wonders Phase attacking your Pact mates or alliance members should be disallowed
    3.) Do not allow members to join another alliance ever after the Wonders phase starts
    4.) Do allow members to send invites to players during the Wonders Phase

    Ideas for alternate end games:

    1.) Have the time clock start the end game just like we do now except have a winners take all finish - Stop all building of new cities hunt down all enemies and winner take all ending unlike a Domination game
    2.) Have a winners bracket style tournament, have a best of that countries server winners worlds compete with other countries server winners.
    3.) Last alliance standing - winner - lock alliances from adding new members and attack until there is only one alliance


    The "Three-Toe-Mutant"
  15. Itbered

    Itbered Lochagos

    Nov 26, 2017
    I would rather see wonders released in stages instead of all at once I think that would actually create wars and stop some of the bigger factions of groups from building all the wonders at once also it would kind of stop the simmers as fighting would be constant after 3-4 months instead of dieing out

    Side note if they blocked people from changing alliances people would still complain due to being backstabbed as the top members of allied groups would still group up and just leave the little guys on the curb also due to the market you could also never stop cross trading cutting out favor farming would just benfit the gold users who can just gold a extra 30 city's