Petition: End Constant Morale Worlds On Conquest

OutOfCharacters

Chiliarch
I used to love no morale CQ-- it was my favorite, what many of us learned on before all the changes. Haven't seriously played CQ since they stopped making no morale CQ worlds-- shifted to revolt, and will only LMD in CQ. So... I clearly don't like it, but the player loss here isn't just due to morale. The constant event flyers have overpowered siege breaks, and it's just no fun any more to honestly try to hold good full morale sieges when you've caught your enemy off-guard. Removing morale won't give us back the worlds of years ago... it will only fuel the hugging fire, IMO, because you need even more to hold sieges.

I like that smaller, well-run teams can still cause trouble, but they couldn't without LMDs. Take morale out and it would just be too darn easy for the MRAs, further killing the game. That said... would be nice to give players the option, see if people want to play it, and maybe surprise us by fighting each other fairly. So you can add my name, though I won't be playing. :p
 

rodger99

Hipparchus
AGAINST this petition.
morale should be active in minimum 50% conquest worlds. It helps the player who joins late on the servers and help small alliance who is fighting against comparatively very bigger in size.

Inno, hear the voices of many players(majority) - who know this game but very low grepolis score /+ no crown in profile And one who are strongly opposite with morale feature, can think / try to start game with new account,,,probably no place in any top 10 alliance, when you will try for invitation in alliance in your ocean, then MRA(common trend) who hugged other alliances in ocean will say sorry, limit full, you will be my food. Still you arrange few other players like you, after that no chance to hold any sieze against myth/LS power of MRA without morale.... if morale active then no need to change ocean, strategy can help you to take revenge.

The player who don't want morale feature, they should not join morale server. When I play moraleactive server then it improves strategy part in alliances. morale killer nukes, lmds and how to defend against lmds, hate and love to lmds etc ...this is extra fun in morale server.

Don't make history this feature.

most petition supporters joins premade in different servers. so they have no feelings for the player who is small and new in game.
 

.magick.

Phrourach
AGAINST this petition.
morale should be active in minimum 50% conquest worlds. It helps the player who joins late on the servers and help small alliance who is fighting against comparatively very bigger in size.

Inno, hear the voices of many players(majority) - who know this game but very low grepolis score /+ no crown in profile And one who are strongly opposite with morale feature, can think / try to start game with new account,,,probably no place in any top 10 alliance, when you will try for invitation in alliance in your ocean, then MRA(common trend) who hugged other alliances in ocean will say sorry, limit full, you will be my food. Still you arrange few other players like you, after that no chance to hold any sieze against myth/LS power of MRA without morale.... if morale active then no need to change ocean, strategy can help you to take revenge.

The player who don't want morale feature, they should not join morale server. When I play moraleactive server then it improves strategy part in alliances. morale killer nukes, lmds and how to defend against lmds, hate and love to lmds etc ...this is extra fun in morale server.

Don't make history this feature.

most petition supporters joins premade in different servers. so they have no feelings for the player who is small and new in game.
I think you have misunderstood the petition. It's not to completely do away with morale completely, but more of an optional setting where there are both morale and non morale active worlds.
 
AGAINST this petition.
morale should be active in minimum 50% conquest worlds. It helps the player who joins late on the servers and help small alliance who is fighting against comparatively very bigger in size.
I actually agree. 50% sounds unbelievably fair. I'd honestly setting on a Lato or Kastoria once a year.
 

claytonsrevenge

Phrourach
i dont agree with the use of LMD's
but at the end of the day we all saw the world settings before we started playing so you cant complain about it half way through the world.

if you feel so strongly about it dont play worlds that are morale active.
this is a war / strategy game if morale is active then LMD's become a strategy and a very effective one.

if you cant think of a strategy to counter LMD's then thats your fault
 
i dont agree with the use of LMD's
but at the end of the day we all saw the world settings before we started playing so you cant complain about it half way through the world.

if you feel so strongly about it dont play worlds that are morale active.
this is a war / strategy game if morale is active then LMD's become a strategy and a very effective one.

if you cant think of a strategy to counter LMD's then thats your fault
Again. I don't care if about morale or LMD's personally. I care about variety and forcing people to play one system. The problem I have is that there's no choice to play something else. Simply sitting out of morale worlds means sitting out for maybe possibly one world every year or two. Nobody is gonna do that.
 
You have my support. That being said, correct me if I'm wrong but couldn't they just determine the settings using a random generator, or at the very least do so using dice/die, or draw them out of a hat.?
 

claytonsrevenge

Phrourach
Again. I don't care if about morale or LMD's personally. I care about variety and forcing people to play one system. The problem I have is that there's no choice to play something else. Simply sitting out of morale worlds means sitting out for maybe possibly one world every year or two. Nobody is gonna do that.
Ok i see what your saying maybe innogames could rotate the world settings better .
i dont how they could do it thats why i dont work for them and have to sweat my balls off in a kitchen
 

Rachel.L

Phrourach
In the last 3 years, there have been 3 morale-inactive servers, less than 10% not 50. The oldest was revolt and the last two CQ. Seems the revolt people don't care about morale but it makes a big difference in CQ, whether for or against. If every fourth CQ world were bumped to morale inactive, just to give players an option, I think inno's bottom line would benefit (making them happy) and a lot of old-timers would play more worlds.

Choice is always good so add me pls.
 

Grandaizer

Phrourach
i dont agree with the use of LMD's
but at the end of the day we all saw the world settings before we started playing so you cant complain about it half way through the world.

if you feel so strongly about it dont play worlds that are morale active.
this is a war / strategy game if morale is active then LMD's become a strategy and a very effective one.

if you cant think of a strategy to counter LMD's then thats your fault
I think you don't understand that there isn't any option to choose between morale or non-morale worlds, since due to last Inno team's decision there are launching only Morale worlds, so we don't check morale settings and choose world by our will, we have two choices play morale grepolis or don't play it at all.
 

Silver Witch

Grepolis Team
I agree that we should have an option to play conquest without LMD abuse. Its not morale generally thats the issue here just the LMD.
 

Makizpwn

Phrourach
+1

Can we also ask for fix of VM in conquest worlds? being scared of entering VM because someone can land CS in last sec and take your city for free is equally if not even more broken then LMD.
 

GrepoMeta

Hipparchus
Yes please, put me on the list.

(only people that have disagreed so far are current LMD's or abuse LMDs themselves, go figure)
 
I'm all for some kind of change being made to the current system (like no morale on sieges) or at least getting a no morale option from time to time on a new world.