• 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!

[FA] Lock in Fellowship Advetnures waypoint

Are you in favor of this idea?


  • Total voters
    64
  • Poll closed .

Lelanya

Well-Known Member
This issue is wildly relevant in terms of making good use of statues. Conqueror is a fantastic strategist and it sounds like Elvenar's developers are taking this issue seriously.
 

Verde

Well-Known Member
Would definitely solve an issue, however a couple of qualifications ...
As MaGorr and Burger Meister Meister suggested earlier, default state for waypoints should be OPEN, allowing no impact on existing play if an FS doesn't want to use the feature.
Authority to open/close a waypoint should logically be at the same level as for opening the chests at the end of a stage, whether (Arch)Mage or Ambassador.
 

UlyssesBlue

Well-Known Member
Although I would personally prefer a means to just highlight preferred waypoints instead of completely locking out unwanted waypoints, I have voted to support since it's not going to hurt me if this feature exists and I don't use it, and I can see a clear benefit for certain types of fellowships.
 

edeba

Well-Known Member
I like highlighting a route, but not locking out waypoints. It is frustrating that people don't follow instruction, but if they are locked, people who just want to drop a badge are very limited. Of course it does not seem to matter how often you message to please leave a waypoint open for a player that is likely to have a badge and hasn't dropped a badge yet...
 

Pauly7

Well-Known Member
I have similar thoughts on this to @UlyssesBlue. The downside for some, of course, with either highlighting or locking is that it takes away the edge from the teams who have already learned to work together and communicate effectively.

For Inno, whether to make a change may all depend on whether they are interested in appealing to a wider market across Elvenar by improving the experience for the teams that play it more casually, at the expense of one of their defining principles of FA - which is to get teams communicating well.
 

T6583

Member
I’m mixed on the proposal. I like the idea of being able to lock waypoints if needed but I disagree with them being locked to start with. I’ve also had problems in my one FS where every time I log in I can’t place any of the badges I have and unless I place a badge of the chosen path then I miss the rewards. Then there’s also the problem of people having been assigned certain badges to make and then others not listening to the don’t make any of x badges y has it covered and then when y goes to place the badges they have not being able to because other people have also made the badges and places them. That also leads to waste and can become an issue if waypoints are locked and that person spent most of their time making a particular type of badge.
 

Jackluyt

Well-Known Member
I don't think it is a good idea to lock ALL waypoints - because that works against players who only log in once a day and can't find a place to put an item.
I generally do the calculations and tell the group to put items anywhere EXCEPT for a few waypoints (like bottom Green) that eat Blacksmiths and which we may prefer to not do - and invariably someone drops all their Blacksmiths there and that forces us to finish it. Usually this does not make a massive difference to the final score - but it would still be nice to be able to lock just one or two.

As a general rule, I keep things simple in FA's, which makes things enjoyable for everyone - so I try not to bombard my players with lots of instructions that change once every few hours
This suggestion would make management so much SIMPLER if it was not over-used!!
:)
 

edeba

Well-Known Member
General comments:

We need more frequent attack instants on MA,
attack bonus units for light and heavy melee and heavy range.
decreased requirement in orcs for negotiation,
increased barrack speed,
less supplies/coin (this requirement is huge if you use the timewarp.)


I agree, total fail from said objectives. For sure, with the feedback from the most active players, total, total, total fail.

@Marindor

In the past 2 players got a different experience in the tournaments based on how many SS upgrades someone had unlocked.
This created a situations where 2 players in the same chapter, with the same unit production got a different tournament difficulty based on how many optional SS researched to completed / skipped, this is now abolished which should even the battlefield

Now we changed to a new form of calculation and actually the same thing happens again.
Now 2 players in the same chapter with the same production do have a different tournament difficulty based on how much they invested in the game, either buying premium expansions or by leveling wonders.

How is this different compared to the old situation, and what is the reasoning behind this move, and why does it specifically target the biggest elvenar fans that are the most active and in case of expansions are the players that fund the game?
If you are aware that one system is flawed why would you build a new system with the same inherent flaw and make it even worse, why not design a system that avoids the flaw all together.
I agree. I added some premium expansions and what happened with the increase in the spire was far, far, far beyond what the expansions could give.

Don't worry I personally do not mind being able to do a lot less as well,
My main gripe is more the difference between player A and B in similar situation just as the SS difference was an issue before, and that it's a disadvantage to progress beyond a certain envelope
Totally agree there, and you need to be able to accumulate excess so you have a buffer for when you can't go all in for the tournaments that you need relics. To me, the dust tournament has always been the most difficult, so it has been more difficult to accumulate them. The when my sister was dying, well, life events interfered with that tournament and I got so I absolutely had to play the next dust tournament strong, and they cancelled it. I think you need to be able to do double what you need to run 24/7 for a cycle. I only started playing this stupid game as an escape from thinking about my sister and how horrifically she was suffering. I didn't need to be reminded I ran out of relics because my sister died and I didn't need to get a hard time with really mean spirited comments that I was upset about it. You need to be able to accumulate double what's needed for a cycle so you can weather the storms, whether they be life events, or poor decisions by Inno.

I have one concern that I have not yet seen in the discussion group. I am in orcs (so a fairly low-ranking, newer player. I use elixir relics all the time for crafting and was down to zero. I was really looking forward to gaining a lot of relics in this tourney but with the new format, I find it almost impossible to earn enough to last me until the next elixir tourney. can you please adjust the relics gained in each tourney province or give us another way to gain enough relics to get us through the 9 weeks it takes to get back to the needed goods tourney?
thanks!!
1. Inno is famous for the bait and switch. We buy the diamonds because we know how much they can help our game, then after they have our money, they do the equivalent of paying for a sports car, and they switch it for a car that doesn't start.

2. In my FS one player has reported being able to do about 30% less than he normally and another played stronger, but reported massive increased, unsustainable losses, reduced kp collection, and has stated an unwillingness to give inno time to correct this, but has said he will leave if it isn't fixed in 2 weeks. I get so tired of this crap of inno upsetting players and losing teammates because of it.


Hello everyone, I come from the Spanish server. I would like to give my opinion regarding everything read, seen and played in this new tournament, and the disaster that is coming over not quickly changing everything ...

1.- Someone explains to me, who can have the brilliant idea of, for example, "raising the difficulty of the tournament" depending on the expansions you have ??? So does the company expect a player to buy diamonds? FULLY ABSURD.
Players will stop buying diamonds (dedicated to expansions which is what is most needed in the city always, space), with which, the company LOSES and the player LOSES.

2.- Raise the level of difficulty in a tournament, depending on the levels of the wonders you have? Another nonsense !!!! The players who have kept this game for more than 4-5 years, are going to leave it instantly, they are the ones with the most levels of wonders, and if you make it difficult for them to play a tournament as they were doing now, taking away the option to win between 400-500 kp each week, they will not hesitate to leave and abandon.
Summarizing point 1 and 2, you have made two changes in the tournament, complicating the lives of the players who have invested the most here and who spend the most time here (I am talking about those who make 30-40-50 provinces each tournament and they like it !! ) Now they won't be able to.
The difficulty mechanic needs a lot of tweaking. My proposal has difficulty at 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, and 1.6 for levels 1-6 at province 41, and the difficulty increasing gradually to that and to continue to gradually increase.

One thing with this change that I am liking more and more is the difficulty mechanic, I just think it needs tweaking in respect to where it ramps up.
I've only seen the orcs because I am in woodelves. I did not need orcs last week and this week I've burned through half of my storage that took months to build. I can only imagine mana is the same.

And the new chests, well, one player in my FS has 154 less kp from the tournament than normal and it looks like we get 3 chest, so 30kp. So net loss 124kp, 14 PoP, 14 EE, 14 runes.

The premium expansions are so expensive and to switch them out for less benefit than when purchase really is unethical.

When I hear that it was difficult for a player to score 1600 in the old system it makes me smile. In Chapter 3, you can already dial 1600(maybe earlier), and the further you move through the chapters, the easier and faster(in time) it is to do it. And if YOU don't do this, then you should think maybe you are doing something wrong in this game. And maybe you just don't need it.:)

About new changes
+/- Reduction in the cost of redemption. But the number of orcs and mana is insane even at 1*
+/- Reduce clicks to 1. But it is very conditional, because the losses will be greater. Perhaps it makes sense for a shorter time
+/- 9 bonus chests. Although the rewards are not worth paying attention to
Everything else is some kind of joke. We already have a spire, there is no need to make a second one. Do not punish players for pumping AW, buying extensions, or just playing longer than others(not premium extensions). If such tournaments come to live servers - well, the world is full of games that I can spend my time and MONEY on.
Seeing your ability in the tournament cut in half is only happening to aggressive players. That is targeting.

Staying in a chapter and working on leveling AW is a playing strategy and it is being targeted as an unacceptable one. If AW are supposed to be helping you, this should make you a stronger player. If not this, what is the point to the AW? If you want to do something about push accounts, make it so that the owner has to put in half the required kp to open the AW chests for others.

You are failing in your aim. When you can earn 600kp from the tournament one week and only 300kp the next week, you can go political and talk a good talk, but that player has clearly been grossly targeted.

Taking away benefit for a purchase is a bait and switch and is unethical.

Hi everyone,

we're not trying to "target" a specific group of players. What we're trying to do with the new difficulty calculation, is make sure that the difficulty calculation matches the actual player progression. To oversimplify it: Let's say player A produces 2000 crystals a day and needs to pay 200 for catering 1 province, player B who produces 20.000 crystals a day should need to pay 2000 for that province, to make it relatively just as challenging. Once again, that's of course oversimplifying it, but that's the basic of this idea.

What we ideally don't want to do, is favor one play style over the other. By just tying difficulty to chapters, we would basically encourage players to stay in low chapters and massively boost their AW without progressing in the game. This would also encourage using push accounts and creating extra accounts with which you do nothing besides building some AW, manufactories or armories and use these resources to boost the tournaments. While we don't have the illusion that we will be able to get rid of pushing entirely, we at least don't want to encourage it or make it attractive.


Totally agree about the need to start over, but some of the intent is simply wrong. Saying you wish to support people's playing style and then specifically targeting one is two faced.

In that case there is some serious rework to be done, essentially starting again from scratch.
We understand the intention, but we also like to point out you aren't even close to realising this unless you start again from scratch.
 

2Serious

New Member
It limits the choices of individual players and forces them to take the route the Mages want.
FA is a team event so I don't think limiting individual choice is a big deal

give mages the possibility to highlight a route.
If there was a choice between what is being voted on here and highlighting
I would take highlighting


I don't think it is a good idea to lock ALL waypoints - because that works against players who only log in once a day and can't find a place to put an item.
I know in my FS, once the desired points were taken care of the mages would open the others up for that purpose
We always track to make sure everyone has contributed before moving to the next map
Some things just have to be left to good leadership
 

UlyssesBlue

Well-Known Member
I have started another suggestion with a poll to see how many people would prefer to be able to highlight waypoints, vs locking them, or would prefer both suggestions implemented, or who don't care too much which happens so long as we get something that solves this problem.
 
I'm totally for it. The big powerful FSs who actually play to win don't need this because they do all paths anyway. However, if you are only doing one path it's frustrating for everyone when someone screws up and plonks 15 blacksmith badges where they're not needed. This idea would make a more relaxed game of one path only _considerably_ less stressful and more fun. And believe me, it doesn't matter how well you communicate, use codes, change the colour of your flag, someone, or likely more than one will ALWAYS screw up.
 

purplefairy

Member
My preference would just be to have the ability to flag or highlight certain waypoints, so there's a clear visual indication to the rest of the fellowship what path/waypoints are a priority, without having the rest of the waypoints excluded or locked. Then it becomes a pure communication tool, without any of the limitations of the existing ones.
That’s a great idea!
 

Eldra

New Member
I think being able to unlock all the way points on the decided path would be smart. That way there are more options for people who work or have different hours of play.