Olympus feedback from a non-EN viewpoint

  • Thread starter DeletedUser57340
  • Start date

DeletedUser57340

Guest
Hello there everyone,

This is going to be a somewhat "ranting", but hopefully discussion-sparking post about how my world-, pact- and teammates (plus I) see the new game mode, and more importantly, some pretty huge issues. I am by no means claiming that these issues haven't been raised by someone else earlier, but given most of us are not English speakers and have zero idea what's going on in the EN external forums, I decided to open this thread. When contacting support about the problems you'll read about below, we got a standard "hey, we can forward it, that's all" answer, which is fair (though disappointing). We thought we can perhaps see whether these issues are region related (centre-east EU), or global and change can be expected, or perhaps with your input I can calm some nerves back in my own community.

Disclaimer: I am a top 20 player, part of the #2 alliance. Our parameters are pretty similar to Sidon: 3/3 Olympus with conquest (8 hours), founding 12 hours, alliance cap 60 (important), night bonus 00:00 - 08:00 GMT+1 (very important).

The problems: (and so far I whipped out my most convincingly boring English, but holy hell I am going to ditch that here)

1.) Who the hell thought being able to cast spells on incoming attack when owning / conquering a temple is a good idea?

So here's a simple scenario, that actually happened. An enemy alliance tried to steal a temple from a friendly alliance. CS went in, and like 1500 birs. Now you would think that given that this particular temple was in the middle of our territory, we easily wrecked that big yellow ship. WRONG. I had a few friends that lost more than 300(!) LS on the way. Yep, that's a full city's worth of LS lost in transition to 3-4 spells. And that happened to every single group of LS attackers that had more than 100-150 LS. Because, of course, THEY CAN SEE WHAT'S COMING. Just pick the big ones, couple of spells, done, harmless against 1500 (and of course, gradually growing as incoming supporting units arrive) birs. And when the alliance consists of 60 people, even with a few offline the damage is so great just from spells, that it makes it virtually impossible, but at least super disappointing and nerve-racking to attack a temple. A TEMPLE. THE POINT OF THE GAME MODE.

You thought it was over? No. That alliance had a sister-alliance. And when they cast all their spells, the swapped players in minutes, and brought a fresh supply of spells. Yep. Oh, and when they were out, they stole the favor from each others with mythological units from gods like Hades who has no big part in these sieges. Another round of spells. :)

And this happened at every single temple siege, which was contested. And after around 3 tries, today the alliance leaders almost prohibit their players from contesting a temple, however low the number of defenders. It's simply not worth it. Maybe when each player will have like 5-10 cities full of LS in the close vicinity of a temple (which is physically impossible) <- no need to continue the sentence.

This simply ruins the gamemode, and definitely the whole early game. When planning to take a temple, alliances prepare by massing favor and favor buffs and daily favor things rather than making timings right. Not to mention the competitive edge players with the +50 favor capacity have.

2.) Why can't we see each other's troops?

So, to add more disgusting elements, we can't even see troop movements in the alliance. Leaders write a letter, like "LET'S GO", and... they have zero idea if anybody reacted in any way unless they type something on the forums or other media, which also makes coordinating attacks and making reactionary tactical moves near impossible. You simply can't say "this is looking fine, lots of outgoing attacks, we might have a chance so let's prep our own CS" because you might land before a friendly attack that the player forgot to announce. But hey, at least the conquesting / owner alliance can see everything, even troop numbers, right? I call bs.

This simply eliminates so many strategy or excitement inducing elements from the gameplay. All I can do is launch some attacks, then pray other people did too and watch a rather empty attack screen with only my attacks approaching the temple in a lonely fashion, and wonder why anyone thought this is a good idea.

3.) Night bonus

I know well this ain't an issue here, but holy who invented 8 hour conquest with 8 hour NB. Put a CS right before NB, and the temple is literally invincible, because NB applies, and of course the reason mentioned above. Does anybody in the designer team planned with this? Because if not, then why are the mods on non-EN servers (or whoever sets NB) allowed to set these in such a way that is literally game-breaking. At least with normal cities you see each others troops and cannot be casted to oblivion, though it's obviously still crap.

4.) Balance / RNG

I saw the video, and that someone said balance was the greatest issue. So why are the unquestionably OP temples in the game (+10% LS)? I mean, that percentage is ridiculous, and given that only 3 spawned in my world, of which 2 on the rim of the world on the other side of the map made it (again) virtually impossible for several alliances to lay their hands on one. How is this fair again? Obviously the closest alliances scooped them up immediately, and you can't really expect a CS to be successful with 24h+ times. Or us to mass found in the enemies throat if there's any space left).


I am not going to propose changes, but I believe some might have been implied in my post. But me and my mates (maybe the whole alliance or nation) are really interested in what the main driving force of the game (we believe that's you guys) thinks about these issues, whether they have been raised, what was the answer, and what can we expect. Hopefully change, because so far not many players are happy with the mode, and we are not even at the large temple stage.
If this post is in the wrong place, wrong time, wrong universe, feel free to move it somewhere else. I am a newcomer here, and I accept your judgement.

Also am I salty? Of course I am, because some of these hit us more than others, but that doesn't invalidate anything. Other alliances reported the same thing. Also, pardon my English skills. I am but a humble post-communist-English-education pupil.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Baudin Toolan

Grepolis Team
This is great feedback and with Olympus being so new feedback is incredibly important to improving upon it going forward. A lot of the topics you've brought up are being looked at from a design stand point but additional ideas on how to improve on the overall nature of commands going to and from a held/in siege temple and what the community believes should and not be allowed interaction wise with those commands would be of help to hear/discuss. Also for the balance of the temples and the random nature of their spawning what would players like to see for different kinds of buffs for the temples?
 

curadh

Phrourach
Many of the concerns raised here have already been raised in beta but as yet not addressed. The rotating of players through alliance in order to cast spells could so easily be solved by having a 72 hour waiting period for all players joining an alliance before they can interact with any temple .. similar to the existing restriction of players joining WW alliances (where they can't send resources or cast spells).
 
Top