Statement: Introduction of new premium features

DeletedUser

Guest
Hello community,
there seems to be displeasure about our new premium feature, the Construction Cost Reduction.
On one hand I understand that you see the balance of the game in danger, on the other hand I would like to explain our decision to introduce this feature.

It is not our intention to ignore the 'Grepolis United' project. Your feedback is still valuable input to us! But the meaning of 'Grepolis United' was foremost to deliver a more transparent development process and to give you more insight on the things we are working on. That's why the Construction Cost Reduction was already mentioned in the roadmap 2013. Of course we want to pull you closer to the development itself, that's why there will be monthly feature polls soon that give you the opportunity to vote on the features you would like to see in the game first.

It cannot be the goal of 'Grepolis United' to cut all premium features due to opinions from the community, because from a player’s point of view, no premium feature would be welcomed (which makes sense to me). But still, the competition in the online game industry is tough; many games introduce premium advantages that would definitely have distorting effects on Grepolis. However, we as a team and company have several costs that need to be covered in order to further develop Grepolis:
- A large team of developers
- Overlapping departments like marketing, administration, quality assurance etc.
- Community managers for all markets
- Costs in the department of marketing, as any game needs a steady flow of new players
- Server supply and service
- As well as smaller positions

The online market is changing and thus the free-2-play model is constantly evolving as well. That doesn't mean that we like all these changes in the industry, neither that they would be suitable for Grepolis. But rest assured that we heavily discuss each new premium feature and think about possible balance issues. We, as a company, have to sustain a healthy balance between features that have been suggested by you – our community – and features that keep the game attractive for new players, features that provide excitement and fun for existing players, and of course, premium features that help us to cover the above mentioned costs. Without all these options Grepolis couldn't exist.

Finally, I would like to say that we closely watch the progression of our premium features and if we see that the balance is shifted in an unbearable manner we will make adjustments, of course!
 

DeletedUser16429

Guest
Can you please post the roadmap on here and also isn't this already in use on the beta?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
As i posted in Richards thread, i understand the need to make money, but i think 25% off the price will un-balance it to much. 15% or possibly 20% is much safer, at least to start off with.

Also can you clarify, will this be able to be used multiple times on one building level??

Those are the only 2 problems i have with it :) I like it how these features encourage simmers to build nice shiny cities for me :3
 

DeletedUser23986

Guest
The problem with the cost reduction is that, it would give premium players a huge advantage, especially in the start of a new world. Already with merchant they produce 30% extra resources. An additional 25% would consequently boost their ability to be conquer ready before bp expires(it is currently only possible in speed 3, but now it would be extended to speed 2). Also spells like happiness can be extended by gold for premium. In this case, they are able to gain almost 100% extra advantage, and that might disort the playing fields. And incase it can be used multiple times to gain back resources, then well, it is out of imagination.

Using phoenician merchant for resources, was also removed from the game for similar disadvantages. I understand the need for revenue, but keep in mind, that it should not, severely, disturb the balance, and spoil the game.
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser345

Guest
Can you please post the roadmap on here and also isn't this already in use on the beta?

Here nick

Envoy I understand your position and I understand the difficulty you face however you also need to put yourself in our shoes. Whatever % that this feature will cut in resources needed it will also cut by the same amount the time needed a player to get to conquest, excluding other premium features such as the merchant will lower this time further. 25% is much too large a cut at the moment in my opinion, as I said in the other thread on a speed 3 world with the average 5 day beginners protection a player could (with this feature) have conquest on the third day and have another two to build up substantial forces to use after bp. That in my opinion would un-balance the start-up of a world. Looking at it from both a player and developer view I would say 15% would be a good compromise.

I am also glad this can only be used once per building level, thanks for that. If the cost could also be increased from (I presume) 25 to 50 gold then that would in my opinion a fair and much more balanced feature.

Cheers,
~Ach
 

DeletedUser6029

Guest
The Envoy,

I was pretty much aware of the trend facing Free2Play games. I have been around a while, and have seen the various games go through "remakes". While some of them I have to shake my head at, and disagree with, I appreciate you coming on here and taking the time to spell it out so black and white. When we did the whole 2.0 thing it was like "here you go, suck it up and deal with it".....Considering the massive directional changes that seem to be happening across all of your games, it was nice that Innogames is making an effort to have direct contact, and a bit of transparency with its gaming population.
 
Top