Ideas/Concerns

Phidippidies

Phrourach
You can use this thread to post ideas/concerns that you have concerning the game. The following questions may help you form your post, and will help us determine priority and start discussions, etc.

1. What is your concern / idea?


2. Why/How do you think this will improve the game?

3. If you have a solution, list it. If not, feel free to ask for one.

Topics that require extensive discussion may result in an external thread.

Disclaimer: There's been a lot of questions recently about what is actually in the power of council. Things we can do: change things in the game, give feedback, give ideas on how to improve the game. Things we cannot do: things concerning rules, or support tools.
If you are really passionate about a certain issue, feel free to privately message us. You can find our contact information here.
 

Loves You

Phrourach
I'm first to post!! @Phidippidies Thanks for setting it up

1)Morale 2.0/Fixing Morale
Since Morale 2.0 is in it's first stage, I wanted to put this idea out there, in case other's liked it.

2) Why/How do you think this will improve the game?
I think this will get rid of "Low Morale Drivers" in Conquest Worlds, and Experienced Players "Abusing" the Morale System in Revolt Worlds.

3) If you have a solution, list it. If not, feel free to ask for one.
This idea began on en101 Amisos, when a smaller player continually harassed me with attacks. While he was able to have his city stacked, and attack me with 100% morale, I could only counter with 67% morale[Against his level 25 wall and troops, it was not ideal]

The Most Recent Morale Changes affect the "Minimum" Morale, given the Player's # of Cities.
However, I would also like Morale to become a "Timed" Buff;

Even if Morale was just moved to something like a 90 Day Buff that appeared on all your cities when you enter the world and ticks down I would be okay with that. It would give everyone plenty of time to grow, and get multiple cities, and after that period it is up, it would throw you in the ocean with the dogs, to either sink or swim.
The timer would initiate itself at the beginning of the world, in-sync with "Beginner Protection", or be built into the Tutorial to better explain the system to new players.

Pros:
Promote Player Growth and Empire Expansion
Prevent Low Morale Driver's during late-game
Increase the Probability of Player: "Rimming"

*Could be added to the Current [Stage 1] of Morale, as a fall-off.
Player's could either reach 11 cities to no longer benefit from morale, or have the timer expire.

Cons:
Length of Timer?
Would Timer still Count-Down during Vacation Mode?
May experience a large "City Grab" during Morale Timer's Expiration Dates
Is Morale actually bad? Or a Game Mechanic that should be "Played Around"


Please let me know what you think
 
Last edited:

Phidippidies

Phrourach
Morale is one of those topics that might require a secondary post for ease of discussion, since it is such a......popular topic as of late, and the opinions on it vary greatly.

Personally, I'm a fan of a time-based morale system - especially if it's a longer time span, like for instance, your 90 day buff example....

However...Inno does not agree. Time-based solutions have been brought up several times by players in dev-blog, and Bernardgra's response is always along the lines of "Adding a time limit to morale is something we do not want to do..." In essence, they fear that it will punish smaller, less active/less experienced players, as well as punish players who reset their account in a world, or are conquered and have to restart. Their opinions might change on that in the future, but it seems right now they've put their foot down on the 'no-time based solution' thing.

As an aside for people interested, there's a lot of discussion about ideas for morale here and here. Aside from the actual process of morale implemented, you can also scroll down to see discussion between the game designer and players about certain suggestions
 

Loves You

Phrourach
@Phidippidies Your Speedy! Thanks for the quick reply;
Round 2:)

1. What is your concern / idea?

Giving the Mobile App some love

2. Why/How do you think this will improve the game?
Players are introduced to the game in one of two ways; The Browser Version, or Mobile Version
Bringing the Mobile App up to Speed, or at least some key features, would make those first introduced through Mobile have a more enjoyable experience, and it would increase player retainment to the game.

3. If you have a solution, list it. If not, feel free to ask for one.
While this idea is nothing that I can do, or other players can do, I think these changes will be for the better, and make the Mobile App less of a Parody in Comparison to the Browser Version

1) Add In-Game Events such as [Pandora's Box],[Grepo-Olympics] to the Mobile App
Level the playing field between Mobile and Browser Player's
Introduce Events to the Mobile Market
Would allow Inno to tap into another source of income that is currently not being utilized

2) Ability to Set Time-Zone
Currently, it is my understanding and experience that the Mobile App runs on the local timezone. However, most players use a standardized timezone to coordinate and communicate attacks and defenses with. While this situation is more prevalent in the [EN] server, as it hosts a increased amount of international players; this problem also arises in other servers as well that host international players, or are in multiple timezone; for example [us],[ru]

3) Live Feeds for Conquest
On the Mobile App, the ability to post "Live" Reports on Conquest Worlds
Siege Reports as a Core Mechanic in Conquest Worlds, and the inability to post them on mobile can mean the difference between winning and losing battles.

While these changes are pretty major; it would bring the Mobile-App up to Speed with regard's to working Game Mechanics.
I am fairly confident that the Mobile Version of the game will never be completely up to speed with the Browser Version;but adding such features would give Mobile Players the tools to participate on an even playing field, coordinate with teammates, and properly use the conquest features as intended
 
@Phidippidies Your Speedy! Thanks for the quick reply;
Round 2:)

1. What is your concern / idea?

Giving the Mobile App some love

2. Why/How do you think this will improve the game?
Players are introduced to the game in one of two ways; The Browser Version, or Mobile Version
Bringing the Mobile App up to Speed, or at least some key features, would make those first introduced through Mobile have a more enjoyable experience, and it would increase player retainment to the game.

3. If you have a solution, list it. If not, feel free to ask for one.
While this idea is nothing that I can do, or other players can do, I think these changes will be for the better, and make the Mobile App less of a Parody in Comparison to the Browser Version

1) Add In-Game Events such as [Pandora's Box],[Grepo-Olympics] to the Mobile App
Level the playing field between Mobile and Browser Player's
Introduce Events to the Mobile Market
Would allow Inno to tap into another source of income that is currently not being utilized

2) Ability to Set Time-Zone
Currently, it is my understanding and experience that the Mobile App runs on the local timezone. However, most players use a standardized timezone to coordinate and communicate attacks and defenses with. While this situation is more prevalent in the [EN] server, as it hosts a increased amount of international players; this problem also arises in other servers as well that host international players, or are in multiple timezone; for example [us],[ru]

3) Live Feeds for Conquest
On the Mobile App, the ability to post "Live" Reports on Conquest Worlds
Siege Reports as a Core Mechanic in Conquest Worlds, and the inability to post them on mobile can mean the difference between winning and losing battles.

While these changes are pretty major; it would bring the Mobile-App up to Speed with regard's to working Game Mechanics.
I am fairly confident that the Mobile Version of the game will never be completely up to speed with the Browser Version;but adding such features would give Mobile Players the tools to participate on an even playing field, coordinate with teammates, and properly use the conquest features as intended
Good stuff.

How about:

4)Battle simulator

5) The ability to time attacks to a city without a unit present. Dodging a couple biremes in and out of a city under heavy fire just so I can have a ship to compare to the time of what might be an incoming CS is a major pain in the whatsits.
 

Rachel.L

Phrourach
LY and Alex-
having drawn up the wishlist of improvements for the app, trying to flush things out with players, and knowing that A) we can't have them all and B) this will probably be something that happens in stages, I asked to talk to a dev so I knew what was really within their capabilities and what was never going to happen. unfortunately, the devs don't seem to want to talk to players as I have gotten no resposne. appreciate your continued input.
 

kuriants

Phrourach
@Phidippidies Your Speedy! Thanks for the quick reply;
Round 2:)

1. What is your concern / idea?

Giving the Mobile App some love

2. Why/How do you think this will improve the game?
Players are introduced to the game in one of two ways; The Browser Version, or Mobile Version
Bringing the Mobile App up to Speed, or at least some key features, would make those first introduced through Mobile have a more enjoyable experience, and it would increase player retainment to the game.

3. If you have a solution, list it. If not, feel free to ask for one.
While this idea is nothing that I can do, or other players can do, I think these changes will be for the better, and make the Mobile App less of a Parody in Comparison to the Browser Version

1) Add In-Game Events such as [Pandora's Box],[Grepo-Olympics] to the Mobile App
Level the playing field between Mobile and Browser Player's
Introduce Events to the Mobile Market
Would allow Inno to tap into another source of income that is currently not being utilized

2) Ability to Set Time-Zone
Currently, it is my understanding and experience that the Mobile App runs on the local timezone. However, most players use a standardized timezone to coordinate and communicate attacks and defenses with. While this situation is more prevalent in the [EN] server, as it hosts a increased amount of international players; this problem also arises in other servers as well that host international players, or are in multiple timezone; for example [us],[ru]

3) Live Feeds for Conquest
On the Mobile App, the ability to post "Live" Reports on Conquest Worlds
Siege Reports as a Core Mechanic in Conquest Worlds, and the inability to post them on mobile can mean the difference between winning and losing battles.

While these changes are pretty major; it would bring the Mobile-App up to Speed with regard's to working Game Mechanics.
I am fairly confident that the Mobile Version of the game will never be completely up to speed with the Browser Version;but adding such features would give Mobile Players the tools to participate on an even playing field, coordinate with teammates, and properly use the conquest features as intended
I agree the mobile app needs an update and you make very valid points, but being a game development student. Phone size restricts a lot of features available in the browser to be made available for mobile, this does make it limited and the more features which get added limit the app. I am not 100% sure but as far as i am aware app creators need to submit each update to Apple for review before publishing the update, this can limit some companies but i am unaware if Apple still require this or if this effects Grepolis. Live Feeds are a huge aspect of the game which is currently not in the mobile app, from personal experience when there is a large conquest underway with a large quantity of support/attacks incoming it can cause issues with the browser's performance, So the live feed for mobile would probably need a big change.
Back to Class for me.
 

DizzlJoe

Phrourach
My idea is a simple one: More worlds with more variety. We saw how popular the anniversary world was. Why not make worlds with different setting? Like no wws with normale settings, worlds with high settings and just for fightings sake. Slow worlds just for fighting without wws. Worlds that are slow with wws. keep the morale out, find some new fun ways to improve the gameplay that are not out yet. This should be a "think about fun ways to enrich and improve the gameplay with different worlds" post. Variety is the spice of life is what they say. The same should count for grepolis.

Grepolis is in a stagnation and a new look at the game, enrich and build upon what is alreadys there. New mechanics, new spices, new ways, new myths, new different worlds with different settings to cater to many different kind of people! We want expansion, feel like back then when we first played a world and have this feeling of discovery and magic back that came with our first conquests and building the first wws. I am fully aware that the new events give inno more cash but they are starting to milk their community. Instead of trying to get as much money out of the people that got together to form a long and lasting community why not go and explore what is not out there yet? Not more events and a changed morale so that players will stay long and give it a chance to use their money. This is not the way forward and this is because why Inno created the Player council: To hear what the players want and improve the game together. I can only applaud this move.


I want all of the inno creative people who made the game great to sit down again and think of fun new ways to bring us an even better game!

 
Last edited:

Rachel.L

Phrourach
so we've been waiting patiently for the update on the gpc talk that was supposed to happen at the end of December
given the holidays, everyone understood when there was no post and perhaps the call got delayed
but in the meantime the train went off the rails, and none of you said boo when much of this centers on topics you have chosen as the gpc's focus

1. peacetime screw up: a post was made not in the general forum but in the gpc discussion so that one of you would weigh in
whether you could do anything or not, your presence here to assure ppl that they were not getting screwed (some felt on purpose) might have diffused things
many still feel the situation has been resolved unfairly and perhaps you could have helped
never know now

2. winter Olympics: the gpc made events one of it's top priorities
players have spoken and said they want less, not more events, esp ones that play favorites
we all know gold spenders have an advantage but other events should be fair to all, not big teams or big players
Pandora was a massive failure - on beta the response was dismal so one can only hope there were massive changes before it went live
the advent wheel was geared to gold users and many complained
now another Olympics favoring large teams... do you want the team swapping for prize-sake to occur as it has in some recently closed worlds?
if the gpc is really working for the players, make their feelings known to inno
if we MUST have events, there are plenty that work for players of all sizes and wallets (recipe events, conquest events)

3. "useless" updates: stop putting lipstick on the pig
I have no idea if some of the recent updates are necessary but some of the prettiness isn't
yes, the new tutorial/ battle camp stuff will help new players but was it needed NOW, esp on top of the 20 other fixes to those areas
there are other problems that have not been addressed, outstanding for months or years, that players are tired of seeing
older worlds have learned that they are "not good enough" to ever see an update or fix
changes in older updates are still broken and new updates have caused other problems
those who use the app greatly appreciate the effort with the newest update and hope it truly works
again, players have asked the gpc to speak to devs about focusing on cleaning up the system rather than adding more layers of paint
pretty and dysfunctional does not get it done

the six month term of our gpc members is quickly coming to an end
pls make use of your final days/ wks
 

Phidippidies

Phrourach
There ended up being no call because not enough inner council members were available to talk at one time - so we actually ended up taking another approach, of communicating directly with developers and then with each other through skype/forum.
The developers are also now moving conversation from just skype calls to now actively talking to us in the forum, so we have opened up a fluid more ongoing conversation with them. Also I apologize for not updating on things recently, we do have some things we would like to discuss soon that we have been talking about the past few days - honestly with the holidays and everything I've been really busy with family things and haven't had a whole lot of free time. (although my sister announced she is expecting, so wahoo that's exciting. she left back for australia though and i won't see her for the next like 2 years probably so that's less exciting...)

The call with Grepolis developers is still set to take place on January 12th, and, at least as of right now EN will be involved in that call. (If more people express interest there might be a vote - right now there are only 5 inner council members that volunteered to be available, so no vote is needed.)

Peace time: honestly, there's really not much that we could do concerning peace time. Player council has been made well aware that complaints about support-related issues are not in our 'jurisdiction' per se, since there are other 'methods of communication' set in place already. Although still, we should have responded on the thread at least stating as much.

Winter event: We, and other inner council members, have expressed our concerns about events with developers. There are threads in inner dedicated to complaints about pandoras box, and we've expressed concerns about the winter holiday event (including your suggestions about possibly making the first spin equal percentages and further spins activating the chance percentages - although the general consensus across the board from inner council members were that the percentage chances shouldn't have been changed). Aside from that they've also been told about specific event-related comments: wanting less events, people expressing that they want 2-4 'big' events, and a number of more smaller 2-day type events, such as hades' portal. As for frequency of events - they did give us a bit of an explanation that towards the end of the year there were more events than they had initially anticipated, and told us that we might expect the number of events to decrease as we head into the new year, as they were testing some of the events out.
Only time will tell with that one, and I do admit that I messed up and probably should have relayed that particular comment on sooner. Clearly with the new winter event that statement isn't showing too much promise, but based on what they said we should see less total events than we saw at the end of 2017.

Lipstick on a pig: Part of this still falls under the 'what is in our jurisdiction' part - the alarm still not working, for instance, probably isn't something that we can control. Although the general idea of wanting to fix the broken things instead of add pretty new features is something that we are working on and have mentioned before - among some other things more recently, such as an end game idea. A little bit of this is difficult to work with because, outside of EN's opinions, we also have to balance the opinions of other inner council members, and also balance the things that the developers think are actually in their control.

Which brings me to my next point of things that we're actively doing: developing ideas for an end game. Now we have to give the disclaimer that we are tossing around ideas, but developers aren't in the process of implementing any of those ideas, or making any promises about implementing them. We recently got approval to speak a little bit more specifically about those ideas with local council to get feedback from them, and we're hoping that after the meeting on the 12th we'll get approval to talk more specifically about the ideas after having a discussion with the developers about it. What we can say right now, is that those ideas are leaning towards a new end game - a domination-based end game.

For the call on the 12th we expect the discussion to focus on end game concepts, priorities for mobile development, and possibly event discussion.
 
Last edited:

Rachel.L

Phrourach
Phi, first congrats on the upcoming addition to the family. Second, as I said, I understood holidays played a role in all you've written. Third, thank you for your reply. I think if much of this had been disseminated piecemeal along the way, there would be a better understanding of what the gpc is doing and is allowed to weigh in on. Please keep us all posted when you can. Thanks.
 

Phidippidies

Phrourach
@Phidippidies
Yes, because conversations on a forum, not face to face or over voicecall are "Much more Fluid".
Seems like a step in the wrong direction if you ask me
Actually quite the opposite - and not necessarily related to each other on the inner council call being cancelled vs the developers adding more conversation than just skype calls.
The INNER COUNCIL ONLY skype call is what was cancelled, mostly because during the holidays we couldn't find a time where more than 2 or 3 players could participate, and at that point a call was a bit pointless. The developer calls are a separate thing, and we still have that one planned for the 12th.

So, just for clarification in case people are confused when I say 'call': The developers are having Skype calls with us still, but on top of that they have added discussion with us in the forum for additional forms of communication.

Frankly, one call a month (or one call every other month, as was the case this first term because of time constraints and the holidays) isn't enough when you're trying to make a difference in the game - especially since everything we do is based entirely on what we can tell the developers. So, we told them we weren't happy with it - and they put the developers directly into the forum.
Personally, I like this better. With a Skype call once a month for an hour and a half, we have a total of an hour and a half to discuss things, then take it to players, and then we have to sit and wait on it for 4 weeks to have another short hour and a half call to touch base on what the player response is. That strategy is fine for certain things - like talking about how upset players are about the winter olympics, or pandoras box, or just general feedback about XYZ thing. But, for instance, the end game idea that we're currently working on requires pretty frequent discussion and research. Since it's in the forum, we have a space to talk about an idea, go get feedback from local council and the players when we have approval to do so, or otherwise the developers can go research a particular aspect to see if it's possible, and then we can come back within 24 hours and continue to have that conversation without having to wait 2 weeks for the next Skype call. I know off the bat it might seem a bit backwards, but I'm actually more than just happy with it - and outside of that we've also thrown around some other ideas about discussion with developers as well, and ideas with getting local council more involved for future terms.

This part is new.... (It's Friday, 1/12/18) ....
Yes! The Skype call has happened, and it was great! Now we have to get a summary about the call approved by Inno, and then posted onto DevBlog. We've sent Inno the summary - now they have to go get it approved and prepare it for posting. I don't have a timeline on how long that will take, I'm hoping it will be soon. It might take a little while depending on if we have to remove some of the information.
I wrote the summary, and I made it as detailed as I thought would be allowed, because I want to share with you guys what is happening - but it's very possible that I've put too much and the developers will say 'no, try again.'

Also, there was another biweekly update on DevBlog recently - nothing really pertaining to player council, but I know players have been complaining that they don't know when there is new information on DevBlog, so I thought I would share and let everyone know.
 
Last edited:

Rachel.L

Phrourach
phi, thanks for the update
glad the call happened and look fwd to the summary once it gets approved
also, appreciate the link to the dev blog since the mods refuse to do so
your efforts are noticed
 

bertie1969

Hekatontarch
a few issues as i see them

pay to win/cheat to win
bot use = seams to be getting alot worse over the last few years
events = there seams to be a event running all the time now days bring back the old days when you use to only have a few of them a year
end game is terrible considering this is a war game i wont go into ideas as in the last 7 years inno have been on about changing it but havent so probally never will
app/alarm issues

i wish you luck in changing things

but i wont be around for much longer to see if does or not as stayed for last couple of years hoping inno would relise they ruined a good game and ever year they made it worse on the whole

ill be leaving the game for good in about a month
 

Phidippidies

Phrourach
Alright - if you haven't already read the weekly update from the last council-developer call, you can click here to do so now. The rest of this post won't make much sense until you do.

Read it? GREAT! Please don't respond on that thread. Respond over here, that way we can have a conversation and people can easily find that post to refer back to it, without having to search through 500 posts to find it


So - we've got some general questions we have to ask of y'all - and depending on the discussion we get we might have to open separate threads for some of them. If you think a certain topic is going to get a ton of discussion let me know (or you're welcome to make the thread yourself) - recently we haven't had a ton of reaction discussions, so for now I'm just putting it all in one place.

So some questions for y'all:

What are your initial reactions concerning the end game idea? Comments, questions, concerns, political manifestos? Keep in mind, certain things you have questions about might fall under NDA and we simply aren't allowed to share.
If you need a refresher on what the general concepts behind the end game idea are, here's a quick refresher:
– Alliances will have to control a certain ‘percent’ of the total worlds’ cities for a period of time in order to win.
– Wonders could become a setting to the world, on/off, and would be available to be built immediately if activated. The base requirements would remain the same.
– Alliances would get bonuses for completing wonders, and for obtaining certain levels of dominance.
– Crown rotation would not be possible – only one alliance may win.
– When one alliance holds dominance for a certain period of time, the alliance will become the winner, and the world will immediately start the closing countdown.
– When the numbers/analytics are done, the full idea will be shared with players via DevBlog prior to implementation, to get more feedback on it.

Premium features in apps -
Not all premium features will be able to fit into the app. But the developers might be able to pick and choose some of the most important ones, and see if those are possible additions. So, if you had to pick the most important premiums you would want to see in the app - what would they be?
(There is also a possibility for 'slimmer versions' of certain premiums in app... for example - the attack planner is something that is likely is just too complicated to fit into the app. However, sending notifications of attacks that were planned on browser to your phone MIGHT be a possibility.)

Would you like to see more casual worlds open/would you like older casual worlds be closed?

And, just a general discussion about spamming. There could be ways to naturally limit the amount of spam that you can send - to get rid of bullying and browser freezing. However, spam is also a strategy, and these limits might not only change the way players play the game, but also the usage of spam. For example, (and this is a bad one but bear with me) you could limit it so that each city can only have one outgoing attack - but this would basically make quick harbor checks on an island impossible. You could also limit the attacks from any one city to any other one city to one attack, but this might have similar impacts as the prior, and could diminish spamming as strategy even further.
So - what do you think about spamming? Do you have any ideas for an in game solution that would still balance spamming as being used as a tactic?
 

Rachel.L

Phrourach
phi, thanks for the update
question for you: seems the #1 concern atm is malfunction of the attack alarm, affect all servers, all platforms
it has been suggested to roll back to the previous version
I believe most would give up being able to change cities names on the mobile in order to have a working alert
why was this not discussed/ considered?
 

Baudin Toolan

Grepolis Team
Alarm fix went out this morning, the update is in the store for android users. Full announcement going up shortly. As always, nice work keeping the community up to date on the council's business Phi.