Minor Improvements V & (I-IV History)

[DeletedUser]

Latest batch of minor ideas to be passed

Proposal
Add an "espionage" report tab

Reason
Too many reports can become confusing, especially when the other player(s) send mass 1k spies.

Details
Add an espionage tab next to the inbox, lootings, and trade tabs

Proposal:
My proposal is that when you go to cast a favor on a city you should have the "X amount" option. This would only work on Patroness, Kingly Gifts, Wedding and Divine Signs.

Reason:
It would make casting spells much faster and much easier.

Details:
It would be similar to the way you recruit troops in the barracks, you can type in the amount of favors you would like to be cast upon your city or you can use the slider to find the correct amount.

Proposal:

The ability to designate which city your browser loads & displays when you first open your bookmark/tab/browser to play Grepolis.

Reason:

- To get right into the action by jumping directly into the city you designated prior to logging off.

- To eliminate bumbling through your city list to get the city where you left the action (i.e. where your colony ship was sent from, you've been victim of attack there, the list really goes on).

Details:

Just include a button designated for this function just to the right of your city name(s), a transparent star or icon for normal cities, an illuminated star or icon for your Main City/Home Base/Stickied city.

Visual Aids:

Balance:

Just a cool function to have, if it's a function already for premium then this is obviously an unnecessary post but I haven't found such a function.

Also I personally believe this feature should be standard.

Summary:

An icon to the right of your cities that would allow you to designate a single city as your main city which would in turn load you into this city first each time you load up the game.

Proposal:
When you cast wisdom on an incoming attack leave it viewable through the attack screen as long as that attack is incoming.

Reason:
Sometimes I forget what a person has in an attack and want to refresh the idea.. but if I accidently delete the report I lost all idea of what they have and have to cast another wisdom spell which to me is a waste of favor. So why not as long as the attack is incoming you can click on the attack and see whats there just like if you were attacking (after the wisdom is cast of course)

Details:
same as when you attack someone but you must cast wisdom first.

Visual Aids:

Balance:
just a slight code change to show the troops

Summary:
not a big change but I figure its something that can only help not hinder gameplay and make things easier for people.

Proposal:
When you want to clear a topic, you need to delete the messages one by one. So I suggest there should be a new option, which makes it possible to select individual posts all at once and delete them all.

Reason:
It would help the leaders and forum moderators to clean up the forum. As it can be pretty annoying when there are a lot of messages that needs to be removed one by one.

Details:
You can either remove more messages at once by selecting them (just like you can select more topics, when you want to remove them) and then using remove selected button

Summary:
A option to remove more messages in a topic at once, instead of removing them one by one.

Proposal
Could a scroll bar be added to the City List Dropdown Menu

Reason
It would save having to go way below the general interface

Details
A scroll Bar needs adding to the right hand side of the dropdown menu

Proposal
Tiny idea but what about a timer in the academy to when you'll have enough resources to research something

Reason
It's good to know when you'll have enough resources to build a building, as it helps you plan more easily, it would be useful in the academy too

Details
It would work the same way as when you scroll over a building and it gives you a time when you'll have enough resources to build it

Proposal: All mythical units (including hydra) should be constructed within the temple.

Reason: Land units are constructed within the barracks, ships - in the harbor. What sense does it make for mythical units to be recruited in the barracks/harbor if they have a temple requirement?

Details: The proper term should be summoning (sounds cooler, no?) and it should be done in the temple, in the corresponding god tab. Also the temple level should determine the speed with which the mythical unit is summoned.

Visual aids: Sorry, I suck at these...

Balance: It would require a similar coding for the temple level to affect mythical unit production costs like the barracks/harbor does with it's units. Adding this feature would allow a more realistic access to the myth units - why would I have to wait for my archer queue to finish, when I want my myth unit now?!

Summary: It provides easier access to mythical units not having to wait for units from the barracks to finish, and also not limiting the barracks for the comparingly long time a mythical unit takes to produce.

Edit: I just figured, that this would be highly practical for administrator aswell. As now mythical units are summarized and built in the troops tab, they could now be summoned in the gods tab.

Proposal
The ability to lock a city into place in the trade overview.

Reason
When using the Administrator's trade overview with a large number of cities, it becomes tedious to have to fetch the same cities over and over again to send resources to/from them. The idea of the Administrator is to streamline the game. It would be an aid to this to allow you to send resources from one city to multiple cities quickly, or to send resources from multiple cities to one quickly.

Details
Basically, when placed into the trading to/from box, the city box would get a checkbox. While the box is checked, the city stays in the box, even after the trade is queued. The box can be unchecked to allow the city to return with the next trade, or the city can be removed using the reset button as you would currently.

Balance/Abuse Prevention
As this is an administrative change, that can only affect the player using it, I see no possibility of abuse or cheating, nor does it change the balance of the game, except to slightly increase the benefit of the premium.

Proposal
Basically, I'd like the ingame [ally][/ally] bbcode to be able to reference the alliance ID as well as the name, similar to the way the [town][/town] can reference either the name, or the ID.

Reason
Some alliances *cough*grepodonkeysnowknycktarnationhugs?*cough* tend to change their names a lot. Even in less extreme cases, name changes are a part of the game. The problem is that a name change automatically greys out bbcodes to the alliance. This is quite annoying and bad for organization. Referencing the town ID as well as the text name would eliminate the problem.

Details
The [town][/town] bbcode already behaves the same way, I imagine that this wouldn't be much different.

Balance/Abuse Prevention
The one major clash I can see would be with alliances that have their names as numbers, which could possibly come into conflict with the bbcode. As for balance, it would have equal positives and negatives. Alliances that change their names, whether just for the fun of it, or as a method of escape would be easier to keep track of for both allies and enemies. Also, this would make a confusion tactic of changing one's alliance name to something close to an enemy, or their ally more effective. However similar tactics can be used with city names, and I don't see this throwing off the balance badly.

Proposal

Many players have complained about the current system for reports is very difficult to manage when you have several supports out supporting cities.

I am proposing adding new more filtering types to the report filtering.

Currently we have Inbox, Looting, Trade
I would like to see these types added:
Support (reports for your supports getting hit or landing)
Spies (all spy reports either from you or others spying)
This leaves the Inbox to contain only attacks on your city so you don't have to spend hours going through reports.

Reason
Will be a large enhancement to the user experience will make the game more efficient.

Details
It will work the exact same way as 'Looting' & 'Trade' but for other types of reports.

 

[DeletedUser]

Previously passed minor ideas

Proposal
The internal game forums should have the same capabilities as the External forums.

Details
Give the in-game forums more HTML commands:

• 
  And other commands like these don't work there.
  
  Visual Aids
  

  Indenting​

  Centered​

  
  Summary
  Implementing more HTML codes into the in-game forums would allow us to organize our posts better especially the table and indent codes.​

• 
  
  

  I think it would help in gameplay and also socially if players could have a buddy list. Not only so you can chat with other online players, but to help in organization and support. I know that others have proposed ideas for seeing online times of other members in your alliance, but i don't think any have proposed the idea of a buddy list.
  
  To prevent abuse, some requirements of the buddy list should be:

  • Player must request to buddy a player, and the recipient must accept before being added. Each player is then on the other's list.
  • If one player deletes a buddy, he is also removed from the buddy's list as well.
  • List should not show exact online times, but show that the player is "Online" if he/she has been active in the last 30 minutes or so.
  • Place an option as for a player to pick whether other players can see if they are online/offline, a sort of invisible option like the one provided on the forums.

  
  To help in organization, the buddy list should show:

  • The buddy's name (alphabetical order)
  • The buddy's ocean(s)
  • The buddy's alliance
  • Distance in time from the buddy's closest city, perhaps given by how long it would take a transport ship to arrive there. if you have multiple cities, this time would change according to the city you are viewing it from.

  
  The player details given on the buddy list are to help see who can support you, and see who you can support. Depending on the space available, it could also include the player's score and the amount of cities owned by the player.

  Proposal
  To simply change the effect of luck from -30/30 to -15/15.
  
  Reason
  Luck has been a thorn in probably every players' side. When you get +20-30% luck, you're extremely pleased with the system, but then the player on the other end of the attack is extremely annoyed. When you get -20-30% luck, you're extremely annoyed with the system, but the player on the other end of the attack is quite happy. The current luck system creates too much of a difference in attacks that it's not quite fair to players.
  
  Details
  A simple coding change is all that's needed.
  
  Let's take a quick look at luck in the simulator:
  
  In a completely neutral setting, where only luck has effect:
  
  

  

  
  
  Analysis Example
  
  -30% Luck, Attacker Losses
  84600 Wood
  68400 Stone
  111600 Silver
  ~7903.33 Minutes or 131.72 Hours
  + You lose even more having to clear the defender's remaining troops
  + You lose even more having to rebuild the troops that would have survived at +30% luck.
  
  30% Luck, Attacker Losses
  58018.5 Wood
  51390 Stone
  73908 Silver
  5483.67 Minutes or 91.39 Hours
  
  Differences in Losses:
  26581.5 Wood
  17010 Stone
  37692 Silver
  2419.66 Minutes or 40.33 Hours
  
  That’s quite a large difference for a matter of luck. I’m not even going to look at it from the defenders point of view or from any naval points of view. And let's not even compare this to a natural 0% luck.

  
  

  Proposal
  I think it would be nice if we could choose to filter our own helpful god casting action reports so they don't show up in the list of all reports.
  
  Reason
  There are many actions that create reports and notifications in the game, and not all of them are useful. The important ones get buried under a mountain of meaningless ones without additional filtering options. Casting helpful God spells on yourself is not something that I find useful to have a report and notification on every time it happens. It leads to me having to constantly clean out page after page on my report window, and I'm always afraid that I'll accidentally delete important reports while trying to clean out the unnecessary ones.
  
  Details
  The checkbox would be found under the following existing options:
  Turn off the notification feature () for new reports
  for attacks on a farming village without losses
  for trade
  New: for helpful God spells cast on your own cities
  
  This would exclude the following spells from showing up as notifications or new reports, but only when cast on yourself:
  Poseidon: Kingly Gift, Call of the Ocean
  Athena: Patroness, City Protection
  Hera: Wedding, Happiness, Population Growth
  Zeus: Divine Sign
  
  This filter should only apply to spells cast on oneself.
  
  Players should still continue to receive notifications and reports when other players cast any spell on the player, and also if they cast a harmful spell on their own city, such as Earthquake or Lightning Bolt.

  
  

  Proposal:
  To change the conquest tab in alliances.
  
  Reason:
  Because it is hard to quickly check who has been conquered in your alliance. In larger alliances I can forsee this being a problem, e.g. you have 20 to check per day. Later on in the game this will increase.
  
  Details:
  In-alliance conquests would be blue.
  Positive conquests would be green.
  Negative Conquests would be red.
  
  Visual Aids:
  

  

  
  

  Proposal
  Include the ability to edit Surveys within the Alliance Forums.
  
  Reason
  Currently, You cannot edit Surveys AT ALL once they have been posted, and they only way to edit is to create an entirely new Survey. With the simple addition of the ability to edit Surveys, any spelling mistakes, any addition of options, would be able to be made without completely re-creating the Survey.
  
  Details
  Next to the Survey title at the top of the thread, there would be an option to edit the Survey. This option would be available to the creator of the thread, Forum moderators, Leaders and Founders. From there, they could edit the title of the Survey, the question of the Survey, the options of the Survey, if the results are showed before someone votes and remove or add new options (Certain rules apply)
  
  Visual Aids
  While now neccesary, I have made some mockups;
  
  Where Edit Option Is:
  
  

  

  
  
  Balance/Abuse Prevention
  There would be several things to stop abuse of this option (Such as editing a Survey if it is not going in your favour):
  
  • Any option with one or more votes will be uneditable and unremovable.
  
  • The question wouldn't be editable after a single vote has cast.
  
  • A reason for editing must be left; just in case
  
  A Little Extra
  Just as an afterthought; The ability to reset the poll (Undo all Votes) could be included.

  
  

  Proposal
  With this feature, the founders and leaders of every alliance will be able to lock an entire sub-forum of their decision.
  
  Reason
  In this way, sub-forums will be locked and spam will be avoided. In addition, except from the leadership every forum mod will have full rights in this section.
  
  Details
  Many leaders prefer specific sub-forums to be locked for the public but not hidden. Such sub-forum usually is the Announcements. However, many times they face a few problems because some players spam there, or flame others. Of course, they can lock the specific thread, but it would be more convenient for them to lock the sub-forum once and for all. Finally, every member will have the right to vote on a survey.
  
  E.g. The Announcements section of the external forum is locked for the masses.

  
  

  Proposal
  I think it would be very useful to have the ability to only forward certain parts of a message.
  
  Reason
  Sometimes my pms with another player may go on for hundreds of messages. But it would be useful to only forward the specific part than the entire message.
  
  Details
  There should be check boxes indicating which messages should be sent. There should also be a select/deselect all check box so you don't get tired of un checking or checking a bunch of boxes. As a visual aid I'll give the one from tw. I'll try and get one for grepo when I get some time
  
  

  

  
  
  Visual Aids
  
  

  

  
  

  Proposal:
  The addition of a way for players to see their daily BP and looting score that is currently used to determine Looter of the Day/ Attacker of the Day/ Defender of the Day.
  
  To also be included in this stat would be your all time personal best score for one day.
  
  Reason:
  This will enhance the player experience by giving a goal for someone to work towards beating their own personal best.
  
  Details:
  A report can be sent out to each player after the day is over. Players will have the option of filtering the report if they do not wish to receive it. It could also be taken to the level of alliance wide to show who is in the lead for the day within the alliance.

 

[DeletedUser]

Continued...

Proposal:
I believe that there should be less colony islands on the map in future worlds

Reason:
I think that they are a little pointless, as they are not often used, and when people leave the game their cities slowly turn into anchors anyway. If we had less of these then there would be less clutter on the map, and possibly people would be closer to each other.

Details:
It will work by on future maps having less of these islands (maybe half the amount).

Summary:
Basically as the colonizing islands are rarely used, i believe there should be less of them around

Proposal:
The basic idea is to incorporate a 'private chat' feature into the current chat system.

Reason:
As suggested by the rules, arguements are best kept to Private Messages, however, chat is live, and therefore can rifle peoples emotions, causing arguements. If a private chat feature was enabled, when fall outs occor they could move them to 'private chat', thus keeping them private, and meaning people can continue talking in the normal chat feature.

Details:
To enable a 'private chat', you simple right-click on a name in the chat, and select open private chat. The private chat would then open in a new window/box thing, like the current chat.

Balance:
The idea could reduce Private Messaging slightly, but will basically free up the normal chat feature, and remove the need for arguements to occor in the normal chat.

Abuse Prevention:
Someone could possibly spam chat requests, annoying the player. So there would be an option to block a given person, and also to disable private chats completely.

Leaders and Founders would be able to see current private-chats, and thus be able to intervene if nesscesary, as well as check them if required.

Proposal:
When entering allies/naps/enemies in your alliance profile, can't you do individual players aswell as alliances?

Reason:
Unnecessary opposition due to the not so precise system we have at the moment for entering alliances. Which could avoid bloodshed if you improved it slightly.

Details:
Add individual players to the enemy adding list aswell as alliances.

Proposal:
Allow Alliance Forum sub-sections.

Reason:
The Alliance forum has a limited space for sections/tabs. Now with the ability to also share sections/tabs with other alliances, it becomes very difficult to have all these sections in such a limited space.

Details:
Allow Main Section/Tabs on the top row, and when clicked will show that section sub-tabs on the 2nd row. This will allow grouping of similar sub sections/tabs under 1 main grouping. For each top section selected, a new sub-section would appear. This will allow many more total forum sections within the alliance forums, since they will be grouped according to main/top section type.

Visual Aids:
This is how it would look on the forums:

This is how one makes a 'Sub' forum (tick the box):

This is how it would look in when using 'Administrate forums' (move up/down like existing forum sections and place them just under the relevant Main Section you want them under):

Balance:
This will act more like a proper forum, with groups and sub-groups for threads. The ability to lock sections would be required to ensure posts end up in the desired sections by the alliance mods.

Summary:
Alliance Forum Sub-Sections would allow grouping of similar sections and tidy up the Alliance Forums greatly. This is just one approach to an impending issue with Alliance forums getting too crowded (a current issue most alliances are experiencing at the moment)

Taken from The West.

Proposal
Increase the Construction Queue by 1.

Reason
Players often overflow on resources because their queues are loaded up and there's just no where for their resources to go early on in the game. With this idea, players, whether non-premium or premium users, all get an extra queue for construction. It would give players a little bit more freedom with their time, and would help a little bit with resource management, especially in the beginning when the development process is rather slow and tedious.

Details
Something really simple, just 1 extra queue for all players.

Non-Premium Users:
Construction Old - 2 Queues
Construction New - 3 Queues

Premium Users:
Construction Old - 7 Queues
Construction New - 8 Queues

Proposal
Add a button to Hide or Ignore incoming attacks

Reason
To avoid staring at the Incoming attack Icon, when a player sends an attack from a long distance
EG: From 70 to over 100 hours away

Details
It will give players the option to Hide/Ignore the attack if desired, to save them staring at that Incoming Attack Icon for major lengths of time

Conclusion
I know the Attack Icon is there for a purpose, however, it would be nice to have the the option to turn it on and off