Premiums: The True Joke Revealed

[DeletedUser]

This following read I would like to open the eyes of premium players across the grepolis server who have discretely been mistreated by the Inno game ways.

I will start this off with a quote from Betsy answering someone's question who was complaining about the screen shot gift:

The only time you have a right to complain about not receiving something in the game is when you pay actual real money for gold coins and they don't show up in your account.

A reasonable and valid point. But as always there is another view to look at this answer from.

I interpret her answer like this: You only have the right to complain about not receiving something if you pay money for gold coins and they do not directly show up on your account. I.E the amount of gold you actually have.

My interpretation: *facepalm Is this a joke? She has to be kidding! I pay for gold, as we all know it definitely isn't cheap. With this gold that I purchase I activate premium bonuses in the form of Commander and Captain, which in return I expect to benefit me in battle. Unfortunately most of the time it only helps to cancel out the negative luck that I get. So what the big picture that I see is that without buying these premiums I would do even worse in battles because I would truly have negative luck, instead of it being balanced out by my premiums. Is this some kind of sick trick being played on us (premium players)? Come on inno games you can do better than that, please stop sucking the money out of our pockets for something that will only prevent us from getting screwed over by your crappy battle system.


Possible Responses from inno games:

A) If you don't like the system then don't play the game.
B) normal users suffer bad luck to its full extent also.

My rebuttals:
A) I don't completely dislike the system at all, in fact I think it is quite fun, why else would have 275k attacking battle points on the Zeta Server. All I am asking is why fix things that aren't broken? But congratulations on covering up these seriously flawed systems by releasing new things that will detract from attention on the broken issues.

B) My point exactly, why would you put this out for purchase when the majority of the time it will be completely ineffective. Why offer us something that will protect those free players when us , the players who buy these premiums will be negatively affected when they are attacking these "free" players.

 

[DeletedUser]

My rebuttals:
A) I don't completely dislike the system at all, in fact I think it is quite fun, why else would have 275k attacking battle points on the Zeta Server. All I am asking is why fix things that aren't broken? But congratulations on covering up these seriously flawed systems by releasing new things that will detract from attention on the broken issues.

There is a completely new system being introduced in the new year, so complaining about flaws in the current one is pointless. The present hunt is just Inno doing something for christmas, nothing to do with premium features or cover ups for something you personally do not like. The fact it is available for both premium and non-premium players shows that money was not in Inno direct mind set at the time.

B) My point exactly, why would you put this out for purchase when the majority of the time it will be completely ineffective. Why offer us something that will protect those free players when us , the players who buy these premiums will be negatively affected when they are attacking these "free" players.

Those things that "protect" free players are still protecting you, you can then purchase a 20% bonus on top of that. It will always be effective, it may be hard to see in the short term, but if you put your reports together and then put those reports without commander or captain there will be a significant difference.

 

[DeletedUser]

The game is sufficiently balanced yet gives premium players the advantages you need if the advantages allowed you to steam-roll players you would have no fun as there is no sense of a challenge.

 

[DeletedUser]

There is a completely new system being introduced in the new year, so complaining about flaws in the current one is pointless. The present hunt is just Inno doing something for christmas, nothing to do with premium features or cover ups for something you personally do not like. The fact it is available for both premium and non-premium players shows that money was not in Inno direct mind set at the time.



Those things that "protect" free players are still protecting you, you can then purchase a 20% bonus on top of that. It will always be effective, it may be hard to see in the short term, but if you put your reports together and then put those reports without commander or captain there will be a significant difference.

Ryan, you conveniently miss the point in both of Raiders rebuttals. First, why not fix the current battle system instead of replace with a "completely new system". Most folks would agree that it is working but that there exist some bugs that should be resolved so that it is balanced and fair. That I believe was Raiders point. The issue of the present hunt is that by throwing other things into the mix, it wreaks of covering up existing bugs. Seriously, why spend 1 minute of programming time on some fluff... when the core (the battle system) needs some fixing (i.e., Zeus Rage killing all chariots and catapults). So now you say we get a completely new system... and yet the old one was never fixed... why should we belive the new one will be any better?

Secondly, I have tracked the battle reports over 300 attacks, 90% all negative luck. There is very little you can say that will convince me that the luck system is not rigged based upon my statistics. What really upsets me and other premium clients is that we have to pay just to balance out the negative luck. I have heard this argument that over time it will balance out... my question is how much time?

The real problem with several of these threads I have been following is that Inno does not seem concerned to listen to its clients. We see the same "canned" response over and over from mods and support personnel. Grepo is a great web based game, but it is not the only one. You folks would do well to listen to REAL FEEDBACK and not add fluff to cover up the other issues. You will see players heading for the exits en mass if you guys don't pay attention to the issues that are bugging players.

 

[DeletedUser4013]

So, is it the battle system that is your concern or the luck factor? If it is the battle system then Grepo 2.0 should hopefully deal with any of those concerns. Besides, the game is very much oriented towards favoring the defender, hence the Commander and Captain bonuses for premium users.

If it is the luck system, then yes, I agree there does seem to be something inherently wrong with that as many of the attacks seem to generate only negative luck. That is something that the Devs should look into, but again, with Grepo 2.0 hopefully this will be worked out.

I think it's a little unfair to be the recipients of these complaints as those of us who mod for the Forums are also players volunteering our time. I think that what should be done is nice requests should be made asking if we can pass these issues on to the Devs through the CM. Flies with honey...

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't know why people rip on mods so much, they didn't make premium or the battle system, yet they have to deal with all the complaints about it. If they cover up a problem, so what? Its not like they are benifiting. 10% of mods get payed, if that. Most are just players like us. I do have to agree that the luck system sucks. I have seen only a couple of attacks that have +luck, and most don't.

 

[DeletedUser2663]

dont forget though, we are unable to communicate with the devs though, the mods act as a medium between us. non of it is directed at the mods themselves.

 

[DeletedUser]

sometimes I wonder... anyway, you are still at an advantage. You have no luck at all, while non-premium users have -luck. So, technicly, you have +luck, and they have no luck.

 

[DeletedUser2663]

as a note about the luck, it is terrible. In my whole alliance on lambda every hit we land on an empty target that dodges is + luck while every time we hit troops it is negative. this is across a collection of 40 players not just one. We havent had as an alliance A + luck hit on a turtle yet. thats how bad the luck is

 

[DeletedUser]

ya, that is a coincidence, I think NOT! it is always plus when their is zero troops in the city.

 

[DeletedUser]

Don't hate the player, hate the devs.

 

[DeletedUser1405]

Hate the devs, get real man, they are the people that made the game you are enjoying playing.
Sorry but the mods do an excellent job policing the game and the forums, they get a pittance in Gold for the insults they receive (normally from someone whos just lost a village).
I'm not going to criticise someone for volunteering their services to help the gameplayers.
I think thats half the problem with most people they forget the mods are players themselves.
Give them a break and enjoy the game as it was meant to be enjoyed.
Rant over for the day

 

[DeletedUser]

@Tyrion - thanks for your explanation. Sorry if you guys think that I am mad at the mod... that is not my intent and I am the first to apologize if my comments were interpreted that way. But, I can't talk to the dev so I am trying to voice real frustrations with what appears to be a real problem in the game. Sometimes the Mod's seem to say exactly the same thing which *feels* like no one is listening to what players are actually saying.

@flackch - I wasn't ripping on the mod... simply pointing out that he did not really answer Raiders question... and that the "canned" answer we all seem to see is just not true. I have no beef with mods and do appreciate their efforts to make the game experience better for everyone.

So, is it the battle system that is your concern or the luck factor? If it is the battle system then Grepo 2.0 should hopefully deal with any of those concerns. Besides, the game is very much oriented towards favoring the defender, hence the Commander and Captain bonuses for premium users.

The two are interconnected Tyrion. I would suggest that they completely do away with luck in its entirety; because it seems like it is manipulated it brings a real "stink" to the game for players like me. Regardless of the defender orientation which everyone appears to be Okay with... when I spend money for premium features, I should get the benefit of what is advertised. When I spend money to get premium features and then the game cripples me to "balance" things out again it does me no good to spend money for premium features... see the recursive logic (which is raiders original point)? If Inno doesn't fix this people like me will stop spending money on the game (because it does no good).

My point about the Battle System 2.0 is if they can't fix bugs in BS 1.0 why would we think they will fix bugs in BS 2.0? I refer you to the known bug regarding Zeus's rage killing all Chariots/Catapults. Upgrading the BS is fine... but they should have showed the players that they are reponding to concerns and bug reports first... imo

 

[DeletedUser]

I know this game is factored to the defender but i am NOT a premium player and i think due to my size fighting someone smaller (someone outside top 20) the luck factor goes way off balanced 66%++ in favor of the defender. Fair? I dont think so.

My Reasons:

1/ A defender can stack up his city with massive amounts of troops to defend his town - as we all know higher the amount of defenders the less damage they take. +1 Defender

2/ Timing for defending from what i have seen is not effected to that +/- 30 sec factor - "The counter timing rule adds or subtracts up to 30 seconds to each attack. This is intentional." from a mod that answered my question. So another words its impossible for an attack to time thier attacks down to the second because they say it can get people to script.... Sorry but have you heard about your server lags? thats enough to mess things up with in it self... ok back to the 2nd point - attacker - must send ships before troops and then the colony ship after all that. Advantage defender can sit back and sniper your colony ship all day long. +2 Defender

3/ Since an attack MUST launch 10+++ waves at a defender but can only protect some and allows the defender to cast spells on your troops like Zeus Rage. So an attack has no way to protect all waves. Oh ya and Zeus rage i got to love that because it happened to me 4x and all 4x i lost all chariots and all catapults. (+2 Defender)

4/ Luck seems to go like this - attacker larger then defender (based on points) the attacker seems to get MORE then 66% NEGATIVE luck and you thing thats all??? no way the ones he get positive luck are the ones like the attack that got Zeus rage on (why not it can not damage the wall because the catapults are dead) or your weakest wave gets the positive luck. ++++(what ever you want to add) Favour Defender again.

I am NOT looking for luck to favor the attacker in reverse but make it 100% fair not favoring one side. I am looking to see this +/- 30 secs to go away the defender can stack troops ahead of large attacks and fend them off. Would it be so bad for more favor room? So we can protect more waves?

agree or disagree up to you

 

[DeletedUser2663]

2/ Timing for defending from what i have seen is not effected to that +/- 30 sec factor - "The counter timing rule adds or subtracts up to 30 seconds to each attack. This is intentional." from a mod that answered my question. So another words its impossible for an attack to time thier attacks down to the second because they say it can get people to script.... Sorry but have you heard about your server lags? thats enough to mess things up with in it self... ok back to the 2nd point - attacker - must send ships before troops and then the colony ship after all that. Advantage defender can sit back and sniper your colony ship all day long. +2 Defender

that point us 100% wrong. if it was 100% correct raiders would be 1- a city and i would be 1+. ino because my defense snipe was affeacted by the counter time rule which caused my defense snipe to land 2 seconds after raiders cs.

 

[DeletedUser]

I would post the entire convo here but i dont know what they say about it.....
oh well here it is...


Request: Timing issues
Meat4Grinder
2010-08-23 19:39:47
I am trying to do a timed attack like scheduling multiple waves. I have noticed even if i launch at the exact time i want to it show the attack landing early in some cases and some late.

Its not my math its not browser issues either if it was browser issues all attacks would be late and not early.

Can you get your game devs to look into this problem. With a war game timing is everything and if you can not trust the time then you fail in your attacks.
Meat4Grinder
2010-08-23 21:21:18
IT did it again i had it timed to arrive at 20:56:22 and after i launched it says its going to land at 20:55:26.......... Common this is unacceptable timing on an active target needs exact.

So fustrating I know because of this issue i will lose my conquest..........
priscilla
2010-08-23 22:55:10
Hello Meat4Grinder,

The counter timing rule adds or subtracts up to 30 seconds to each attack. This is intentional.

Sincerely,


Priscilla
Meat4Grinder
2010-08-23 23:18:42
Then this is messed up, why did one go almost 60sec earlier and why was this rule implemented?
priscilla
2010-08-23 23:33:33
The rule was implemented to prevent people using illegal tools to remove the defender's chance of sniping an attack.

Sincerely,


Priscilla
Meat4Grinder
2010-08-23 23:35:59
Ok then why did mine when i launched it Reached almost 60sec early if max is +30 or -30 sec.??

priscilla
2010-08-23 23:50:27
Perhaps one of us is mistaken. The actual timing deviation is not published. I have never seen more than 30 seconds.

Sincerely,


Priscilla
Meat4Grinder
2010-08-24 00:00:30
Well i am accurate when i launch and noticed this, but thier way i think this gives the defender options to side step and take out units. Kinda unfair when distance travel give him and his alliance plenty of time to respond to the threat.

So in theory if I time an attack say no later then
35 secs prior to landing for ships and say troops no later then 32 secs before landing all my waves could land for ships 65 secs and 5sec before my CS and my troop wave could land 62 secs prior up to 2 seconds prior.

Actually i think the above is dead nuts correct.

But i still dont understand the ruling someone like me stay in front of computer for HOURS setting alarms and launching to be accurate is a waste of time because if the person is online he can side step everything how you guys have it set up and just be there for 1 wave and then all our efforts are in vain.

There should be a discussion on this on the forum because its not right and you guys should be able to tell if someone is using something illegal (what ever that can be).
priscilla
2010-08-24 01:44:39
There is no way of detecting macros and without having the police seize the players computer, there is no way of proving somebody was using them.

There have been several discussions on the forums, but most people have moved on and allowed for the variation.

Sincerely,


Priscilla
Meat4Grinder
2010-08-24 02:29:09
Well I think its not right due to if your attacking with big armies and you have to clear ports first then clear army and just simply if the person moves his ships out of the way of you ship wave you get screwed.. I find this unfair for the attacker meanwhile your saying its fair for the defender. why dont you make like a 5 min battle rule battles last 5 mins in that time you can be rienforced etc.

I just think its unfair..
priscilla
2010-08-24 03:04:28
I don't make the rules, I just uphold them. If you have any suggestions for improvements for the game, there is a section in the forums for that purpose.

Sincerely,


Priscilla

 

[DeletedUser]

Wait what?! My point was right?
"....this game is factored to the defender but i am NOT a premium player and i think due to my size fighting someone smaller....the luck factor goes way off balanced 66%++ in favor of the defender."

This basically proves that premiums players are only really paying to balance out their attacks against other players. So once again the question is, why are premium battle bonuses even offered? All they are doing is making us , the players pay to help fix their broken system.

 

[DeletedUser5]

dont forget though, we are unable to communicate with the devs though, the mods act as a medium between us. non of it is directed at the mods themselves.

More than 90% of the moderating team have no contact with the developers, or anyone higher than our Community manager.

There are a select few that do have the privilege of being able to talk to people higher up in the company. Therefore channeling your anger/dislike/requests through the moderators for the most part is unfair, as they're unable to do anything other than go through the community manager.

 

[DeletedUser]

Secondly, I have tracked the battle reports over 300 attacks, 90% all negative luck. There is very little you can say that will convince me that the luck system is not rigged based upon my statistics. What really upsets me and other premium clients is that we have to pay just to balance out the negative luck. I have heard this argument that over time it will balance out... my question is how much time?

I'd be interested in seeing that with screenshotted / saved reports to back it up.

 

[DeletedUser]

Other ways you can get +20% attacking bonus

Research phalanx and cast heroic power on your attacks. Now hush up you silly raider.