• Dear forum reader,

    To actively participate on the forum by joining discussions or starting your own threads or topics, you need a game account and to REGISTER HERE!

Discussion Tournament Changes (post-release)

Slikkdogg

New Member
I have been trying to get an account here so that I could comment on the new tournament. I'm happy that I can finally do that. I have read a lot of the comments and here is what I like and don't like about the new tournament.

I love the fact that the new tournament has gone from 4 fights to one fight. This makes fighting faster and easier. I only have a city in Beta that is on Chapter 2 so I've only got 5 provinces to fight in. I would say that this week the fighting is easier than last week. I also think that it should be easy for a beginner to progress through the first few rounds of fighting.

Unfortunately, based on what I have heard from other players that do have enough provinces to fight the past 20 provinces, I have to say that the rest of the new tournament needs a lot of work. I dislike the new weighting of tournaments that look at different variables like AW size and Expansions. It sounds like those of us who have spent $1,000's of dollars to expand our cities and who love fighting through 60 provinces are now being punished for that move. I'd say this isn't a smart move on Inno's part.

I've also dislike intensely the fact that the tournament has switched to a random enemy troop configuration. I have been fighting for over 3 years now and I know that when the dust tournament comes up that I need to train certain troops and I, therefore, use my time boosts to train those troops. Going to a random enemy troop battle takes planning away and makes you have to train all troops equally which is ridiculous.

I may not be known here but anyone who is in my world knows that I love fighting and I always am near the top of the leader board. This new tournament is a total buzz kill and I don't support it.

I would suggest that you stick with the current tournament except change the fighting from 4 fights to one fight. The rest I would scrap as a terrible idea and go back to the drawing board.
 

edeba

Well-Known Member
That's an offensive, self righteous and arrogant attack on a good strategy. AW make you stronger, hence stopping and working on them makes you stronger, making it a good strategy.

2. Having costs only depending on chapter progress could lead to weird strategies (like stopping chapter progress to level AWs)
 

edeba

Well-Known Member
Huge problem with starting troop size and then the level of penalty for expansions and AW levels.

My idea about not counting one premium expansion per chapter, and then reducing that 0.75 to 0.5 for the rest and then not counting AW levels below the chapter number would really reduce the range for that difference in starting squad size.

  1. The problem I am finding in Beta is that troop requirements escalate rapidly province by province and round by round - so you will have 60 squads in province number one, lose almost none in fights - and by the time you get to province #20 you only have 2 squads to fight with!
    And if you use lots of time boosters to make another 30 000 troops - then that 2 squads only goes up to four -and you STILL don't have enough to fight with.
 

Dl. Goe

Active Member
My idea about not counting AW levels below the chapter number would really reduce the range for that difference in starting squad size.

Maybe, but only for those who kept all wonders at similar levels; for people who choose to focus on a few wonders, but higher levels, it doesn’t help too much; and it would make an unfear difference between these two types of players.

Or, if I have to try something:
- do not include extensions into formula; it really doesn’t make sense to encourage people to “stay small”, or don’t buy…
- allow a number of AW levels out of the formula; maybe something like 10 times the chapter? And only the rest should be counted into that formula
 
Last edited:

CrazyWizard

Well-Known Member
Maybe, but only for those who kept all wonders at similar levels; for people who choose to focus on a few wonders, but higher levels, it doesn’t help too much; and it would make an unfear difference between these two types of players.

Or, if I have to try something:
- do not include extensions into formula; it really doesn’t make sense to encourage people to “stay small”, or don’t buy…
- allow a number of AW levels out of the formula; maybe something like 10 times the chapter? And only the rest should be counted into that formula
hmm bit contradicting,
 

maxiqbert

Well-Known Member
Maybe, but only for those who kept all wonders at similar levels; for people who choose to focus on a few wonders, but higher levels, it doesn’t help too much; and it would make an unfear difference between these two types of players.

Or, if I have to try something:
- do not include extensions into formula; it really doesn’t make sense to encourage people to “stay small”, or don’t buy…
- allow a number of AW levels out of the formula; maybe something like 10 times the chapter? And only the rest should be counted into that formula
although @CrazyWizard 's remark isn't totally wrong, I think that having a simple, mathematical, "right to AW" is a good idea. I guess it's easier and allows more freedom to make a sum of your levels and deduce your "right to aw" to create (or not) a penalty for "overwondering". If your "rights to aw" increase with your level, it defeats the stagnation strategy, which is a good thing.
My 2 cents : rightstoaw = level²
 

DeletedUser2630

Guest
In my opinion, it is not possible to include those wonders at all, because there is no such solution that would really be fair in the strength of the wonder.

Some wonders are only for the city, some only for combat, some only for negotiation. But most wonders do not provide the same power. level A != level B

Likewise, with space, vacant land does not have the same effect as a place filled with armories or manufactories.

Introducing this nonsense into tournaments will certainly result in players leaving, because I don't believe they will like this. I have already announced my departure.
 

meadle

New Member
depuis le début j'ai lu les articles, je peux comprendre la raison de ce changement, mais maintenant si vous avez donné la possibilité à des joueurs avec des extensions payantes ou des quêtes de bâtiments de faire des scores importants sur des tournois ce n'est pas leur fait et je comprends très bien que ils en profitent.
LES ORCS:
dans la mesure du possible je me bats, et donc ne rencontre aucun problème avec la production d'orcs qui ailleurs pour ma part n'ont rien à voir dans les biens (après tout bien que virtuels ils sont humanoïdes et semblent avoir une culture. que les humains ou les elfes?).
Cela oblige les commerçants à les produire, c'est donc à occuper une partie de leur espace pour une technologie qui ne leur est pas utile mais obligatoire au vu des quantités demandées dans les tournois, et ils sont donc amenés à utiliser des extensions payantes, ou non, qui selon à ce que j'ai compris s'inscrire dans le calcul de la difficulté du tournoi, cela en a fait une double punition.
Il ne devrait donc pas être utile de négocier des tournois.
la bataille unique:
Cela me semble bien, maintenant pour les combats automatiques, ce n'est pas top.
les troupes aléatoires:
Bien que cela empêche une préparation pour un type de tournoi qui apporte un peu de piquant au jeu, ne peut être mis qu'à partir des 20 provinces ce qui permet au joueur d'apprendre le combat sur les premières provinces.

Quant aux offres d'achat de diamants, vous pouvez les mettre dans le placard, je ne vais pas payer pour compliquer mon jeu, jouer à ce qui serait stupide.
 

Deleted User - 86059

Guest
Please remember that it is English only in the forum

depuis le début j'ai lu les articles, je peux comprendre la raison de ce changement, mais maintenant si vous avez donné la possibilité à des joueurs avec des extensions payantes ou des quêtes de bâtiments de faire des scores importants sur des tournois ce n'est pas leur fait et je comprends très bien que ils en profitent.
LES ORCS:
dans la mesure du possible je me bats, et donc ne rencontre aucun problème avec la production d'orcs qui ailleurs pour ma part n'ont rien à voir dans les biens (après tout bien que virtuels ils sont humanoïdes et semblent avoir une culture. que les humains ou les elfes?).
Cela oblige les commerçants à les produire, c'est donc à occuper une partie de leur espace pour une technologie qui ne leur est pas utile mais obligatoire au vu des quantités demandées dans les tournois, et ils sont donc amenés à utiliser des extensions payantes, ou non, qui selon à ce que j'ai compris s'inscrire dans le calcul de la difficulté du tournoi, cela en a fait une double punition.
Il ne devrait donc pas être utile de négocier des tournois.
la bataille unique:
Cela me semble bien, maintenant pour les combats automatiques, ce n'est pas top.
les troupes aléatoires:
Bien que cela empêche une préparation pour un type de tournoi qui apporte un peu de piquant au jeu, ne peut être mis qu'à partir des 20 provinces ce qui permet au joueur d'apprendre le combat sur les premières provinces.

Quant aux offres d'achat de diamants, vous pouvez les mettre dans le placard, je ne vais pas payer pour compliquer mon jeu, jouer à ce qui serait stupide.

Translation =

from the start i have read the articles i can understand the reason for this change, but now if you have given the opportunity for players with paid expansions or building quests to make high scores in tournaments it doesn't is not their doing and I fully understand that they take advantage of it.
THE ORCS:
as much as possible I fight, and therefore do not encounter any problem with the production of orcs which elsewhere for me have nothing to do with goods (after all although virtual they are humanoid and seem to have a culture. than humans or elves?).
This forces traders to produce them, so it is to occupy part of their space for a technology that is not useful to them but mandatory in view of the quantities requested in the tournaments, and they are therefore led to use paid extensions, or not, which according to what I understood to be included in the calculation of the difficulty of the tournament, it made a double punishment.
It should therefore not be useful to negotiate tournaments.
the unique battle:
Sounds good to me, now for automatic battles it's not great.
random troops:
Although this prevents a preparation for a type of tournament which brings a little spice to the game, can only be put from the 20 provinces which allows the player to learn the combat on the first provinces.

As for offers to buy diamonds, you can put them in the closet, I will not pay to complicate my game, play what would be stupid.
 

palmira

Well-Known Member
OK, just discovered on my live forum a major factor being disregarded so far in all equations: rank. So the higher your points the higher your SS, Inno really wants to punish the paying players and drive them to quit the game.

We haven't figured it out before because points are not very high here on beta so @MinMax Gamer you need another column on your sheet.
 

Deleted User - 81190

Guest
OK, just discovered on my live forum a major factor being disregarded so far in all equations: rank. So the higher your points the higher your SS, Inno really wants to punish the paying players and drive them to quit the game.

We haven't figured it out before because points are not very high here on beta so @MinMax Gamer you need another column on your sheet.
I haven't seen that, and I looked at cities with up to ~700K points on Beta. RPs are obviously correlated as there is an AW component in there, but that's pretty weak. RPs are definitely not used in the Spire formula, I looked into that back in the day. The limited data I've seen so far from Beta tournaments didn't need ranking points for the current formula to explain results very accurately.

EDIT: Read this thread on PT forums. Just one poster mentioned rank, I see no references to any supporting evidence. Nothing to see here, ranking points are still off the table.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser1657

Guest
Has anyone tried to lose a fight for the early provinces, say first 10?

Specifically placing 5 squads but of the opposite type to what you should be using. For example using a mage to beat light range and light melee enemies?

My basic test and small sample size would indicate its pretty difficult to lose in the first 6 provinces. I started to lose from around province 7 or the hardest rounds in provinces below 7. I would expect a person with poor combat skills would pick better compositions than the worst possible, just by following the in-game hints/highlights.

Training and squad size would seem to be the bigger obstacles to overcome, in those rounds and thus in achieving 1,600pts. A person doing less rounds would encounter more difficult fights to get 1,600pts but still generally fights of 1.25 or easier. So barely anything harder than the current round 3 difficulty.
 

Dony

King of Bugs
OK, just discovered on my live forum a major factor being disregarded so far in all equations: rank. So the higher your points the higher your SS, Inno really wants to punish the paying players and drive them to quit the game.
Rankings has no effect on SS, if it had it would be a triple dip through AW, normal/premium expansions and ranking itself
you can test that very easily, teleport all your manufactories before spire/tournament start and you will see no difference
 

Elderflower

Well-Known Member
I don't ever fight in the tournament and was finding that it was getting impossible to finish even 6 provinces because I would run out of goods. Today for the first time I was able to finish 10 provinces easily. For our Fellowship we are now doing so much better and gaining more reward chests than before. I had been losing interest a bit in the tournaments and tending to do the Spire more but these changes have rekindled my enthusiasm for tournament so I hope we do not go back
 

DeletedUser3314

Guest
CityRaceDateChapterExpansionsNext Premium CostChapter ProgressTotal AW LevelsT1 Boost%T2 Boost%T3 Boost%maxBMAPVnStarnProvTSSoTSSeCoinsSuppliesT1T2T3OrcsMana
NL2E2020-07-21214450100140%140%28001411---
NL2E2020-07-22214450100140%140%2800142159001260275
NL2E2020-07-23214450100140%140%2800143169001480332
NL2E2020-07-23214450100140%140%2800144180001700380
NL2E2020-07-24214450100140%140%2800145191001910427
NL2E2020-07-25214450100140%140%28001461101002130483
CityRaceDateChapterExpansionsNext Premium CostChapter ProgressTotal AW LevelsT1 Boost%T2 Boost%T3 Boost%maxBMAPVnStarnProvTSSoTSSeCoinsSuppliesT1T2T3OrcsMana
ZZ1E2020-07-212134503086%86%21001311102140034
ZZ1E2020-07-222134503086%86%21001321113270027034
ZZ1E2020-07-232134503086%86%21001331167410102
ZZ1E2020-07-232134503086%86%210013412111540054068
ZZ1E2020-07-242134503086%86%210013512718680068085
ZZ1E2020-07-252134503086%86%210013613225810200
Catering Cost might start a lot lower on Beta but they increase very fast. I'm afraid that when I can compare 3 or more provinces catering cost will become higher then they are now on Live. So Inno's promise that catering cost will be about half of what they are now on Live won't hold up very long. :(
 

Pauly7

Well-Known Member
Catering Cost might start a lot lower on Beta but they increase very fast. I'm afraid that when I can compare 3 or more provinces catering cost will become higher then they are now on Live. So Inno's promise that catering cost will be about half of what they are now on Live won't hold up very long.
Even without this, the catering cost is not halved in reality. It's dressed up to be, but when you include all the Orcs, mana, coins, etc, and the fact that we will need to cater bigger amounts in a province (4 x the old way), then the catering is more expensive from the get go.
 

spennyit

Well-Known Member
Hi all!

Did anybody already mention that going from 4 encounters to 1 has also at least a drawback? If you lose, you lose 4 times than if you lose today, i.e. is like losing all the 4 province encounters that doesn't happen quite often (never) in today's tournaments. I think this is worse than having to click 4 times to play a province.
 
Last edited:

Karvest

Well-Known Member
It's not like loosing all 4 encounters in one province, but like loosing 4 encounters out of X provinces, and it should be almost the same in a long run.
 

edeba

Well-Known Member
The formula they are using is causing an exponential problem. Consider chapter 16, so with 16 neutral levels there would be 19 that could count. With what they are doing there is 35. 16 squared is 256. 35 squared is 1225. These aren't the numbers in the formula, but it is a demonstration of what an exponential problem does. So 1225/256 is about 4.8. It actually significantly helps players that choose to level on a few AW at higher levels. They said that it would always be beneficial to move forward in the game and you would do better by steps to improve your game, but the formula completely fails because of the exponential nature of the formula. My suggestion moves it into a range that increased squad size would not be so outrageous, people would not be having these silly conversations about deleting AWs.

Your alternative suggestion definitely favors new players over long term players. With my suggestion new players could be competitive with long term players within a year.

Maybe, but only for those who kept all wonders at similar levels; for people who choose to focus on a few wonders, but higher levels, it doesn’t help too much; and it would make an unfear difference between these two types of players.

Or, if I have to try something:
- do not include extensions into formula; it really doesn’t make sense to encourage people to “stay small”, or don’t buy…
- allow a number of AW levels out of the formula; maybe something like 10 times the chapter? And only the rest should be counted into that formula
 
Top