Ares has arrived in Grepolis and we would like your feedback on our latest addition to the Grepolis pantheon of Gods. If you have any questions or feedback about Ares please share them in this thread.
New God Ares Feedback Thread
- Thread starter Baudin Toolan
- Start date
xFate
Strategos
What is genuinely wrong with the team that created this?
@Baudin Toolan do you guys actually test the things you create
@Baudin Toolan do you guys actually test the things you create
Could you perhaps elaborate on the aspect or aspects of the new God you don't like or find problematic?
Lethal-Bacon
Strategos
what he meant to say is that everyone complained about ares 2nd power of insantly adding 500 spartakois to any attack command, alongside ladons being overpowered, beta test showed them hitting 200k dlu siege stack killing over 14k total dlu on wall 0 and luck 0 while if 500 spartakois are added as well it kills nearly 28k dlu, when compared to other myth thats like double power without addition of spartakois, everyone pointed it out on beta and none of the values for ladons have been changed for live worlds, as seasoned vet of conquest worlds, this is legit the end of conquest worlds, its quite possible to build a full ladon nuke within day and a half or 2, and if each ally team mate has 1, it makes entire world/conquest unplayable, will make everyone abandon every other myth type, and majority if not everyone will stop building offense land units in general, while most turtling up and building walls turning worlds effectively into revolt, either way, extremely unbalanced.
not sure yet what kind of impact this ladon will have on revolt worlds with walls, but either way more defense enemy has more damage it does, so LTS cities will get demolished as well...
not sure yet what kind of impact this ladon will have on revolt worlds with walls, but either way more defense enemy has more damage it does, so LTS cities will get demolished as well...
xFate
Strategos
My problem is that it seems that devs are just power creeping with every new thing that is added. Artemis introduced Griffons which are now the best flyer to build. Aphro introduced sirens and passive population, and now Ares introduces broken spells, Ladons. This was all done without any changes elsewhere in the game. Power Creeping is not the way to go and when the entire community screams from the rooftops that this update is going to contribute to the dying population of this game, maybe devs should listen to us.
DeletedUser41523
Guest
@Baudin Toolan Are you guys sure about that Ladon? Or Ares in general? This makes my complaints about Aphro look like an overreaction.
I'll certainly let our developers know how our community feels about the power creep and the specific impact the spell and new unit will have on worlds.
DeletedUser41523
Guest
Yeah this shouldn't go live as is. Like I know the devs want to keep things interesting. But the Ladon + Spartoi combo can straight up one shot a decent mid game siege. I think its safe to bet these things will be featured in future events such as the hen too. Which means everyone will have multiple full ladon nukes early on. This would basically lead to people playing dead to get sieged and then using doubles or quads to take BP.
Lethal-Bacon
Strategos
units from 2 newest god are not in the upcoming easter event, most likely due to devs not creating unique god rituals, so they might be included in halloween
kingpg28
Phrourach
wow i am just seeing this and quite possibly the worst idea i have ever seen to put this in perspective... no buffs or anything.. a ladon nuke flying to a siege stack is the equivalent of roughly 5400-5800 slings WITH NO BUFFS ares army spell adds 500 spartois WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO 113 GRIFFINS LMAOOOOOo there is no way in hell this was thought out.... you are sending a griff nuke and a OP ranged nuke at a siege in 1 attack.... we havnt even factored in heros AND tokens that add +20% attack
in case you want to see what will be hitting your sieges from now on it will be this:
https://prnt.sc/10fqv29
no hero or luck included
in case you want to see what will be hitting your sieges from now on it will be this:
https://prnt.sc/10fqv29
no hero or luck included
Reimu Hakurei
Chiliarch
it would be a shame to make a ladon nuke of this size and sacrifice 5000 dlu just for the sieger to pull the cs and all def
KEKW
KEKW
IDontMainLulu
Lochagos
On revolt (and on walls) the biggest problem are not the Ladons, but the Ares' Army. Look in these simulations the damage to walls that a full catapults nuke + Ares' Army can do (and i didn't consider Aphrodite's Narcissism)
| vs 30.000 dlu | vs 45.000 dlu | vs 60.000 dlu |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
It would do some more damage, you missed the second part of Ladon' Passive: additionally, all other units in this attack gain 1% attack power per Ladon (up to 10%).
Actually, there is a Bug, if Inno will decide to fix it, it will be possible to sacrifice up to 100 catapults and gain 1.500 Fury.
Lethal-Bacon
Strategos
how is it a bug, it says for each 1 population sacrificed it gives 1 fury, 1 catapult is worth 15 fury, 10 cats 150 fury, 100 cats 1500, no bug, just the way game works.. probably the fastest way to reach 5000 fury cap
Shuri2060
Phrourach
Bring polls back here, and genuinely ask the players this (maybe give it a few months til asking about Ares so they get a feel first):
Would you prefer worlds
1. with Aphrodite
2. without Aphrodite
Would you prefer worlds
3. with Ares
4. without Ares
And see what the players think.
These recent new features are just so poorly thought out / untested. At least Artemis has some semblance of balance to her.
Would you prefer worlds
1. with Aphrodite
2. without Aphrodite
Would you prefer worlds
3. with Ares
4. without Ares
And see what the players think.
These recent new features are just so poorly thought out / untested. At least Artemis has some semblance of balance to her.
IDontMainLulu
Lochagos
Exactly, it should work like that, but there is a Bug and you can only sacrifice a maximum of 100 population's worth units, if you have 100 catapults, the spell will only sacrifice 6 catapults (=90 population=90 fury), i hope they will fix this soon.how is it a bug, it says for each 1 population sacrificed it gives 1 fury, 1 catapult is worth 15 fury, 10 cats 150 fury, 100 cats 1500, no bug, just the way game works.. probably the fastest way to reach 5000 fury cap
There are two different description of Ares' Sacrifice, the announce say "Sacrifice up to 100 population's worth of non-mythical units" but the one in game say "Sacrifice up to 100 non-mythical units".
Shuri2060
Phrourach
The dev team really need to talk to or hire experienced players, or even become them and hear out what they think would be good additions to the game.
The design team don't seem to have a feel for the game at all - I see no other explanation for how these new gods passed the ideas stage.
There is little hope in improving a game when the designers are unaware of the meta behind it, ie. strategies used by top players. Only having minimal basic knowledge (eg. 'a slinger is a ranged unit') does not cut it. Being aware of the role the units and spells have in strategical play is fundamental before even beginning to propose changes.
If you keep up with the ideas sections perhaps you would notice the common cause of bad ideas? Bad ideas are usually made by players with surface level knowledge of the game. They don't realise the possible implications that could be caused on realisation. The designers of the 2 new gods seem to be no better, or even worse with regards to this. I can at least see the Olympus endgame was well thought out design-wise, and balances, etc, were attempted. Even if not perfect, I think it was a good first attempt - and it's something that can be worked on and improved with time. These 2 gods? Not so.
In this way, listening to suggestions (that are popular) from players for new features is much more effective. Ideas from scratch just won't work like this. I'm implying that popular = well thought out (at least I'd hope so), but obviously that's not always the case and the ideas there would still need to be polished, etc. But at least I hope they would form a good base. There's also the problem of implementation - as players we are less aware of the difficulties with regards to that when proposing ideas. However I'd take good ideas that are hard to implement over bad ideas that are easy to implement any day.
===
I had my misgivings when I heard a ranged offensive flyer was designed, and the comments above seem to prove this. Without appropriate balance, the introduction of this unit essentially completely breaks down existing meta strategies in CQ. Until now, CQ DEF should be built heavily anti-blunt/sharp because those are the only 2 types of OFF flyers. This is fundamental to considering DEF ratios your alliance should adhere to. No doubt the designers behind the new flyer were unaware of this or simply didn't care - this basically just chucks years of meta out of the window and now ratios will have to be reworked from scratch. You're flipping the game's meta upside down with this, and I can assure you that's not a thing you want to be doing without good reason.
I don't think it's as bad as introducing 50 multiplicative anchors to the game - that's just ridiculously awful, but this is still unacceptable.
And that's only the tip of the iceberg with regards to the problems these new gods bring.
The design team don't seem to have a feel for the game at all - I see no other explanation for how these new gods passed the ideas stage.
There is little hope in improving a game when the designers are unaware of the meta behind it, ie. strategies used by top players. Only having minimal basic knowledge (eg. 'a slinger is a ranged unit') does not cut it. Being aware of the role the units and spells have in strategical play is fundamental before even beginning to propose changes.
If you keep up with the ideas sections perhaps you would notice the common cause of bad ideas? Bad ideas are usually made by players with surface level knowledge of the game. They don't realise the possible implications that could be caused on realisation. The designers of the 2 new gods seem to be no better, or even worse with regards to this. I can at least see the Olympus endgame was well thought out design-wise, and balances, etc, were attempted. Even if not perfect, I think it was a good first attempt - and it's something that can be worked on and improved with time. These 2 gods? Not so.
In this way, listening to suggestions (that are popular) from players for new features is much more effective. Ideas from scratch just won't work like this. I'm implying that popular = well thought out (at least I'd hope so), but obviously that's not always the case and the ideas there would still need to be polished, etc. But at least I hope they would form a good base. There's also the problem of implementation - as players we are less aware of the difficulties with regards to that when proposing ideas. However I'd take good ideas that are hard to implement over bad ideas that are easy to implement any day.
===
I had my misgivings when I heard a ranged offensive flyer was designed, and the comments above seem to prove this. Without appropriate balance, the introduction of this unit essentially completely breaks down existing meta strategies in CQ. Until now, CQ DEF should be built heavily anti-blunt/sharp because those are the only 2 types of OFF flyers. This is fundamental to considering DEF ratios your alliance should adhere to. No doubt the designers behind the new flyer were unaware of this or simply didn't care - this basically just chucks years of meta out of the window and now ratios will have to be reworked from scratch. You're flipping the game's meta upside down with this, and I can assure you that's not a thing you want to be doing without good reason.
I don't think it's as bad as introducing 50 multiplicative anchors to the game - that's just ridiculously awful, but this is still unacceptable.
And that's only the tip of the iceberg with regards to the problems these new gods bring.
Last edited:
Lethal-Bacon
Strategos
i can somewhat appreciate mods thinking of new things and adding new gods and features, but the tests they do in their sandbox worlds does not translate well or at all to live world usage, so unless they have a medium to high IQ they cant really see if something is overpowered or not, beta worlds did not test it long enough to see how exactly broken it is and now they are pushing it on live markets, as shuri said, they need to hire or consult some veteran players about upcoming changes and additions to see what an actual player would think/say about that, dont care if said player needs to sign NDA but releasing stuff like this untested isnt the way to go..
1saaa
Strategos
Wouldn't it be great if a large amount of the player base requested a players council to help guide Inno's obviously unsuited developers? It's a real shame that we haven't created one of the largest petitions in grepo's history to signal that.
xFate
Strategos
nah we never did that