Olympus World Feedback Thread

DeletedUser56911

Guest
so are the world rewards for olympus stackable?
eg you win a golden fleece on 2 worlds do you get a 20% hero buff instead of the 10% for 1 world?
 

Hydna

Grepolis Team
so are the world rewards for olympus stackable?
eg you win a golden fleece on 2 worlds do you get a 20% hero buff instead of the 10% for 1 world?

No - in the same way that the favor and warehouse increase is not stackable. However there are changes to the profile depending on how often you win. I just posted the details of the rewards in the Sidon thread.
 

DeletedUser41523

Guest
I’d maybe put a limit on the founding any island thing. Maybe to a week after BP for certain islands?

Reason I’m saying this is because in a no morale setting it’ll start becoming easy to jump late arrivals.
 

Hydna

Grepolis Team
I’d maybe put a limit on the founding any island thing. Maybe to a week after BP for certain islands?

Reason I’m saying this is because in a no morale setting it’ll start becoming easy to jump late arrivals.

You are right that this could become an issue. I would like some more feedback on this as the game progresses. Even with morale a new player could have an issue. The registrations close once 70% of the anchors are taken so that may mitigate the situation.
 
the main issue is we cannot find a good strategy . Should it be based on the small temples ? the possible big temples ? or location ? also i think this goes with a revolt world better
 

1saaa

Strategos
the main issue is we cannot find a good strategy . Should it be based on the small temples ? the possible big temples ? or location ? also i think this goes with a revolt world better
I'd agree that this seems to mold better with revolt but as for strategies. Its a completely new endgame. Honestly I don't think the optimal strategy will be discovered in the first server and if it was discovered I'd be kinda disappointed.

Its a great new oppertunity for planners and strategists to set their minds on a new challenge.
 

DeletedUser41523

Guest
I think the concept in theory is really cool the world seems to have brought some old faces back and is growing at a slightly above average rate for whats its been the last couple of years. But some things come to mind.

1) Everyone knowing where small temples are right away. I think that they should appear roughly five days ahead of small temples unlocking entirely. This prevents more experienced teams that know to scout from just snatching a prime temple location. The lone exception to this being portals, which should be central in every ocean.

2) Alliance small temple capacity should be a setting ranging anywhere from controlling a max of 4 to infinite numbers of smalls. But only one portal can be owned per alliance regardless of settings.

3) The ability to found anywhere from the get go. This screws over players and teams joining late or newer players trying to learn. Even in core oceans there should be something like a three week timer to this.

4) The map could stand to be smaller with maybe more islands in a closer proximity.
 

DeletedUser55742

Guest
fix the unit count, we cant see the units in full, that should be too hard, at 10k and 20k you wont see all 4 digits. seems like an urgent thing that never gets attention:)
 

Hydna

Grepolis Team
fix the unit count, we cant see the units in full, that should be too hard, at 10k and 20k you wont see all 4 digits. seems like an urgent thing that never gets attention:)

You only have to click on the tooltip to see the units there. There are just too many at that size font to see and rather than reduce the size we gave you a tooltip.
 

Shuri2060

Strategos
Proposals:

1. Either alliance leaders or all members receive attack reports when the temple is attacked. Atm there is none - you only get a support attacked report if you have units inside. Alternative - make receiving temple reports an alliance authorization.

2. Allow multiple Temple windows to be open at the same time (and maybe an option to have a smaller window). Or maybe an option to create a live feed on a temple (just like a conquest) so it can be put in Notes.

3. Imo it is better to display the landing time rather than the time left (in Temple Info) just like CQ live feeds.

Reasons:

1. Not much to say really. It feels like it just should be there and it helps players keep up on enemy intel. Atm only way to do it is write down what you see in the attack before it lands or save your wall.

2. Makes it easier to monitor multiple temples at the same time.
 

Shuri2060

Strategos
Bug:

An unintended consequence of the recent update is that you can't even spell your own attacks on a temple your ally is sieging (both pre-spell, and already outgoing atk). Think can be considered a bug.

There are situations where you will want to do this.

btct8RZ.png
 
Last edited:

Shuri2060

Strategos
UI Suggestion:

It may not look as good, but imo it would be better if the Goto, Atk, Support icons for temples are in the places they normally are for cities for consistency.

After years of playing the game, I think for many players, their muscle memory would make them click in the wrong place to attack/support.

F0UP4Ms.png
Y185upK.png
 

DeletedUser43665

Guest
1. On app would be good when clicking on temple link, can see attack, support button. At the moment need to go to temple and from there choose attack or support
2. On alliance temple overview would be helpful when after troops in temple shows how many my support is there and is there-at the moment have to click on every temple to see where you have what.
also after own troops would be good when there is troop movements attacks supports icons and how many so when something moving can go to temple and look whats coming in and out, at the moment is same as with own support, have to click temple by temple to see
 

Shuri2060

Strategos
1. Following up from above, I think general city UI should be incorporated more into Temple UI. Imo, the existing UI for ordinary cities is pretty good.

Eg.

6XO59sv.png
P29yy9c.png


For the Alliance Temple Overview suggestion, that would be a nice addition, but like ordinary cities, there is the Troops Outside overview to help with that.

2. It would be nice to add Temple Shield time to the Attack Window (just like beginner's protection).

3. It would be nice to (partially?) color the icon in according to the alliance flag that owns the temple

jSRjuwp.png


4.
For neutral temples, a percentage indicating the units left (separate numbers for naval and land) would be helpful in the Olympus Overview. And an option to sort by naval/land percentage

FtdjBrf.png
 
Last edited:

Jimothy5

Chiliarch
I would like to make a suggestion regarding how Temples operate with regards to sending support to a neutral temple. Currently the command is not allowed to go through, but I would suggest that the support should still be sent to the temple even if the neutral units are not clear. Currently, it is difficult to time an OP to take a temple because support cannot be sent until it is clear.

You should be able to send the support to the temple, and if the neutral units are not clear by the time the support command lands, it should bounce off and behave as devs want, no random supports on the initial temple stack. This would allow teams to time supports behind a CS when taking a temple without disrupting the intended game feature of only being able to support a temple once it has been cleared of neutral units.

EDIT: linking my suggestion thread for a simulator change as it is related to temples as well
https://forum.en.grepolis.com/index.php?threads/simulator-change-suggestion.62821/
 

Hydna

Grepolis Team
I would like to make a suggestion regarding how Temples operate with regards to sending support to a neutral temple. Currently the command is not allowed to go through, but I would suggest that the support should still be sent to the temple even if the neutral units are not clear. Currently, it is difficult to time an OP to take a temple because support cannot be sent until it is clear.

You should be able to send the support to the temple, and if the neutral units are not clear by the time the support command lands, it should bounce off and behave as devs want, no random supports on the initial temple stack. This would allow teams to time supports behind a CS when taking a temple without disrupting the intended game feature of only being able to support a temple once it has been cleared of neutral units.

EDIT: linking my suggestion thread for a simulator change as it is related to temples as well
https://forum.en.grepolis.com/index.php?threads/simulator-change-suggestion.62821/

I think it makes it more of a strategic play not to be able to send until its clear - its easy to time a cs with support but its not so easy to clear, and then keep it clear while you organise things. This was intended but the devs are happy for feedback on the subject.

You can take temples anywhere on the map. If you can just time everything then the stronger alliances have an easy shot at all the temples. This way a weaker alliance has a shot if they are grouped closely to a temple and a stonger alliance has to actually plan in advance if they want to go further out.

The temple boosts change the game and nothing is straightforward whether its small temples where you need to plan, large ones where you dont know the location or Olympus where its all over the place. I think this is a game that is not only about strength. Its about planning well in advance to cover the possibilities that can be thrown at you.
 

Darth Akula

Lochagos
Suggestion for Temple worlds with regards to starting:

Instead of starting in center of the map and working outward. Away from where all heavy fighting could/would be in the later portions of the world where BP matters a HECK of a lot more. Start in the outer Rim and have the temples spawn inward with Olympus spawning in the dead center - or as close as possible to it.

I know that would have to change the game features/mechanics a bit, but it makes more sense imo. Basically, everyone can just spread out all over in the core, drama is usually high because of this and lots of players quit and lots of alliance fall easily to this. Thus, towards the back end, there's usually 1 maybe two alliances that could ever really win it. The point of the new EG is to fight for Olympus. With how it's set now, each alliance has 21 days to have a SUPER short TT (in theory) and thus basically ensure a win depending on factors such as gold spending, size, active roster, city count, temple boosts acquired, etc.

People could still colonize at the center if they wanted in order to prepare and strategize for the EG, or at whatever small temple too. This would definitely allow a fight for Olympus which is the whole point of the EG and give equal opportunity (but still not equal ability) to conquer it. Whereas now, as it shifts, pretty much only 1 team has opportunity and ability and if the biggest/best team gets it first, they're - in theory - going to win it right out the gate. Preventing other alliances from ever having a fair chance due to the long TTs vs the Olympus holding alliances short TTs.

Edit: And then the temple buffs makes things a heck of a lot more favored to whichever team gets the "right" temples and if #1 Alliance gets the "best" temples, and is located in 45 (for example) and the game decides to start Olympus in 45. Guess who just won? Alliance #1. Without a bit of a hassle either because thanks short TTs, buffs, and possible gold usage, roster size, city count, and so on.
 
Last edited:
Top