Enar's Embassy needs serious rework

[SoggyShorts]

It's still terrible and not worth putting in the city

Wait... Are you saying that dedicating a whole expansion for a Broken Rune Shard once a week isn't worth it?
Surely getting some mana once every 3 days makes up for it though, no?

I don't know why I always think of the Thrones when discussing the worst wonders. Maybe because Enar's is just so forgettable?

 

[Deleted User - 81190]

I don't know why I always think of the Thrones when discussing the worst wonders. Maybe because Enar's is just so forgettable?

Thrones AW is not bad per se, it is just very, very specific, so not very useful for the vast majority of players. And unlocked way too early. But for a certain small group of players it may make a difference between getting that +1 rank or not.

But Enar's is just awful, I can't think of any circumstances where Enar's would be a better choice than alternative means of getting what Enar's is providing.

 

[Pauly7]

Enar's Embassy needed reworking the minute it was released. Now, especially since the changes they made to the tournaments, probably half of the AWs need reworking if they are to remain relevant. I doubt that it's going to happen, though, because the new AWs they are releasing are just as bad and they seem to be fine with it.

As for Enar... well I think that one is beyond redemption. Just take it out back and throw it in the wood chipper.

 

[Pauly7]

I don't know why I always think of the Thrones when discussing the worst wonders. Maybe because Enar's is just so forgettable?

See, I've tossed Endless Excavation recently, and Watchtower Ruins, and Lighthouse of Good Neighbourhood, but I stalwartly refuse to give up Thrones because of its important place in my castle grounds.



Its 11 AW levels makes for a costly bit of city-scaping though!

 

[iDavis]

Now, especially since the changes they made to the tournaments, probably half of the AWs need reworking if they are to remain relevant.

Supposedly this is something what they know about and one of the possible solutions should be to avoid having each wonder the same impact on the tournament's difficulty. Whether they do indeed implement it this way or not is in the sky right now, but I doubt we will see some changes in wonders productions any time soon (I would more likely count with increasing the demand for the resources that these "weak" wonders produce (like the high demands for mana in ch17 research, that maybe showed some first step for Maze of the dark matter..).

 

[Pauly7]

(I would more likely count with increasing the demand for the resources that these "weak" wonders produce (like the high demands for mana in ch17 research, that maybe showed some first step for Maze of the dark matter..).

I haven't tried chapter 17, but I can't envisage ever having a problem with mana. Is it too much for the Dragon Abbey to cope with?

I'm glad to have never found a good use for the Maze, because I think it's the biggest ugliest monstrosity on the game.

 

[edeba]

I haven't tried chapter 17, but I can't envisage ever having a problem with mana. Is it too much for the Dragon Abbey to cope with?

I'm glad to have never found a good use for the Maze, because I think it's the biggest ugliest monstrosity on the game.

I think the maze uses too much space. They would do well to put in technology to reduce its size from 5x6 to 4x5.

 

[Pauly7]

I think the maze uses too much space. They would do well to put in technology to reduce its size from 5x6 to 4x5.

Yeah I looked at the maths on the Maze years ago and realised that it made no sense compared to other sources of mana.

 

[edeba]

And here's an idea for the next chapter, "the compactors," and have a bunch of technology to shrink the size of AW
Tome of Secrets to 3x3
Leave Golden Abyss
Endless Excavation to 4x3
Needles to 4x3
Monastery to 4x4
Crystal Lighthouse to 5x3
Watchtower Ruins to 4x3
Thrones to 3x5
Bulwark to 3x5
Mountain halls to 3x5
and so on...

 

[Deleted User - 81190]

Supposedly this is something what they know about and one of the possible solutions should be to avoid having each wonder the same impact on the tournament's difficulty.

That would be an even bigger can of worms than it is today. And I can tell you right away how it's going to go if that is to happen. They will reduce impact of Thrones and Enar's and other AWs like that that few if any people build (especially competitive tournament players), and will raise the impact of Monastery, Simia, damage boosting AWs etc. In the "interest of balance" and "by player demand to have different impact".

You've heard it here first.

 

[Pauly7]

They will reduce impact of Thrones and Enar's and other AWs like that that few if any people build (especially competitive tournament players), and will raise the impact of Monastery, Simia, damage boosting AWs etc. In the "interest of balance" and "by player demand to have different impact".

Haha, this brings back so many memories of when something has been asked for and the wish is granted, but they find a way to move the goal posts so it ends up being worse than before they started. I always liken Inno to the movie Bedazzled.

 

[edeba]

They need to fix the weighting of AWs overall. To place an AW you get a penalty for the land expansion, you get a penalty for doing the technology, you get a penalty for each level on it and ultimately you are not always better off progressing.

They hit hard with massively increasing tournament difficulty, massively increasing squad sizes, and moving forward in the game is no longer making your game better.

 

[Jammin]

This year we had the honor of speaking to Lukas, one of the product managers, and were able to ask him a few questions from you, among other things. Read the whole conversation with Lukas here:

 

[Lovec Krys]

@Jammin Something usefull? Since it is in pictures, can't copy it to translator.

 

[SoggyShorts]

This year we had the honor of speaking to Lukas, one of the product managers, and were able to ask him a few questions from you, among other things. Read the whole conversation with Lukas here:

Why oh why would they post an image of text?

@Jammin Something usefull? Since it is in pictures, can't copy it to translator.

My German is really rusty, but:

1.How long have you been with Elvenar?

Blahblahblah​

2.what are you working on?

New spire rewards 2021​

3. Do you play, whats you fav chapter?

sorcs &dragons blahblahblah​

4.whats your fav part of elvenar?
_______?
5. Will you make app and browser have all functions?

We are trying ( I think)​

Browser world map visits something something​

6. In the new tournament progress= punishment, you fix?

We don't see a problem.​

It's better than before.​

Still monitoring but looks good.​

Players with premium expansions are doing better than players without​

Progress is still a positive​

Edit after melting my brain trying to translate: AW levels, expansions and tech progress all are good, no negative. ​

Maybe small tweaks like AW not being equal​

7. Artifacts for old wonders?

We have some ideas on how to use old artifacts.​

No artifact trading between players​

​

Anyone who can read German better than a 5-year-old please correct me, but I think that's about it.

 

[Lovec Krys]

@SoggyShorts Thx, but meanwhile I found the czech translation (or maybe the original and on german forum it's only a translation?), so I have read it whole.
I'm especialy worried about Spire rewards reworking since lately it usualy meant nerfing them.
And any differentiation between wonders penalty would probably mean even worse system that the current one.

Well, who cares, in worst case scenario I'll simply stop producing spells in MA 24/7 to maintain relics levels.

Edit: Ok, the czech is the original (in our forum we have monthly based an Elvenar person interview with the main forum moderator, usualy with players, but sometimes withour forum stuff or with our CM, and this time it was with Lukas)

 

[SoggyShorts]

I'm especialy worried about Spire rewards reworking since lately it usualy meant nerfing them.

Yeah and I have a city that has never won an endless scroll after months of clearing to the top... I better win a few soon

 

[Lovec Krys]

Well, on the other hand, if they added a 1x1 building producing 1CC/day only, I would gladly destroy my 6 Libraries after I get 6 of them (I have Libraries for CC production mainly)

Back to the topic: I think that it is safer for us to leave Enar as worthless as it is now than risk nerfing more usefull wonders. Of course devs will do what they want regardless any feedbak as always.

 

[Pauly7]

If it's the same interview with Lukas, here is a slice that someone on EN translated:

Are there any changes planned in the way the size of the army is calculated? Why should players be disadvantaged when buying premium expansions? And why are they also disadvantaged by the construction of ancient wonders?
We evaluated the tournament data, read the feedback from the players (indeed, we got a lot from the forums thanks to our skillful community managers), introduced some elements of the player's feedback, and understood the impact of the tournament change on the game. The basic goal of the calculation formula is to offer all players a tournament that does not benefit anyone and is also a challenge for everyone. Nevertheless, progress in the game in any form should remain an advantage for players and help them succeed in the tournament. We believe that with the new tournament system, we are closer to this goal than before, when the size of the division depended only on research into the size of the division. In this old system, the top positions in the tournament were simply shared by those who had the most provinces at their disposal.

We understand the frustration of players who, with the new system, score fewer tournament points and receive fewer tournament prizes than before. However, no player should be afraid of further progress. For example, from the analyzes we've done, we don't see that players with more premium expansions do worse than players with fewer. On the contrary, these players continue with significantly better results than the other players being compared. And it's the same with ancient wonders, the progress of the research tree, or common extensions. Of course, there is a discussion about how much better these players should do, but we do not see any "penalty" among the above-mentioned factors, which would unbalance the overall tournament result of the player.

Of course, this does not mean that no further adjustments will come. We will certainly continue to monitor the overall behavior of the tournaments, including the above formula. For example, we already see a weakness of the system in the fact that the impact of the levels of ancient wonders on the pattern is the same for all wonders. We strongly agree that some ancient wonders are more important for tournaments than others, and the formula does not currently take this into account. In addition, we continue to monitor players at the forefront of research to make sure that the cost of the tournament does not become too high at some point. However, the number of these players is quite small and it takes a little longer to obtain statistically significant data for analysis.

 

[Aeva]

If it's the same interview with Lukas

It is the same interview (I read/speak English and German).