• 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)

DeletedUser2803

Guest
And no, I cannot afford to use any temp. buildings for Spire (without them the Spire's several waves are mostly unfightable) since thx to the new tournament system I'lll have to use them all to get needed relics for crafting spells (so spend them all during 2 tourneys out of 9).
Last time I checked spire and tournament were running mostly simultaniously. So why can't you use the temp. buildings for both?
 

ErestorX

Well-Known Member
For those that claim they should keep the old formula, this one also has an exponential growth curve,...
If I remember correctly the old formula consists mainly of the sum of 3x Nr of Troop research over all troop researches. If you had chapters with an equal Nr of troop researches this would be growing marginally slower than the squared chapter number. Therefore I have always viewed this as a quadratic function with a lot of flexibility for the devs to deviate from it. The picture you show is consistent with my thinking, so why do you call it exponential?
 

edeba

Well-Known Member
I wouldnt care much about what will happen in the future, they should make competitive playing field for all players across the board right now.
I think that comment needs some context... Surely a new player should not be competitive with a long time player. I think the goal should be that there is a path for a new player to be competitive with a long time player.



A score of 8K maximum in the tournament seems to me something reasonable for the most hardcore players
Completely disagree. For a player that can do a score in the 16k range regularly it is a massive slaughter to cut them back to 8.


About the tournament, I think 3 big issues need to be addressed. Some other may be addressed too, but with a lesser priority.

1) squad size formula isn't good. This needs to be clear. There is no way around by tweaking it. This formula just needs to be dropped, and something else needs to be found. This is also true in the spire, by the way.
2) the difficulty growth is too steep. IMHO you shouldn't face numerical superiority before province 15 on the first round. This gives those with several phoenixes a too big advantage over us without.
And the squad size growth is too steep too. a week's production on the battlefield isn't reasonable. This gives those with several brown bears a too big advantage.
3) the tournaments really need to be different from one week to the next in a foreseeable way. This is one of the pleasant things, helps build a fellowship's cooperation and gives people a sense of achievement.

other issues :
- mana and orcs shouldn't be demanded in the "next" chapter. At least +2 chapters to give players some time to build up production.
- proportions between gold/tools/orcs/mana/ tradable resources needs to be reviewed.
- quite often, when you finish your fight (more so when you cater i think), you don't get or at least don't see the rewards.
Well thought out... I agree that the spire formula is insane as well. There was a massive difference going from chapter 15 to 16, far, far, far beyond any benefit from moving forward.

1) I still like my suggestion of one free premium expansion per chapter and then reducing what they add to the formula from 0.75 of an expansion to 0.50, and making all of the AW levels to a person's chapter level free. It takes away the penalty for long time players and it also addresses the concern about staying in a low level and just concentrating on a few AWs and becoming too powerful. Some are suggesting a fixed number of levels per chapter, but that does allow a lower level player to focus on just a few AWs and not have them count and the AW penalty remains excessively steep. Compare the chapter 8 and the chapter 16 players who both work on say 4 AWs for troops and both prioritize them to level 30. The lower level player would need to advance to get the same number of free levels as the more advanced player, and I thought encouraging advancement was a goal.

The other thing that isn't being considered is that most AWs are hardly worth placing until you get them to at least level 6, yet the formula incurs a penalty immediately.

The AW and premium expansion penalties need to independent, not compounding.

2) I think previously the squad size growth was the same, but the massive ramp up on difficulty and the increase in starting squad size makes this new tournament extremely punitive. There was no increase in difficulty through the levels previously and you didn't do something like add 1% per province, but a massive 5%. So, instead of each level going up by 15%, now they go up by 5%. I did my proposal with 1% per province increase, but 10% increase between levels, but I also started it easier. I'm pretty sure I'd find it more difficult than the current tournament, but not a total slaughter.


Base multiplication and growth are 2 different things. The growth is the same, just the base is different now. Also I assume you are one of the smart players who skipped all optional squad size technologies. Players who didn't skip them (probably most players do not have this secret knowledge) will proably have lower squad size now.
There was nothing secret about the differences in the squad size in the tournament. Some players seek out information, do analysis, pay attention and develop strategy from putting that kind of work into the game. Others don't put the time into reading forums, doing calculations etc.
 

alexgreat

Member
IMHO, @Dony regular LR would have done better.

About the tournament, I think 3 big issues need to be addressed. Some other may be addressed too, but with a lesser priority.

1) squad size formula isn't good. This needs to be clear. There is no way around by tweaking it. This formula just needs to be dropped, and something else needs to be found. This is also true in the spire, by the way.
2) the difficulty growth is too steep. IMHO you shouldn't face numerical superiority before province 15 on the first round. This gives those with several phoenixes a too big advantage over us without.
And the squad size growth is too steep too. a week's production on the battlefield isn't reasonable. This gives those with several brown bears a too big advantage.
3) the tournaments really need to be different from one week to the next in a foreseeable way. This is one of the pleasant things, helps build a fellowship's cooperation and gives people a sense of achievement.

other issues :
- mana and orcs shouldn't be demanded in the "next" chapter. At least +2 chapters to give players some time to build up production.
- proportions between gold/tools/orcs/mana/ tradable resources needs to be reviewed.
- quite often, when you finish your fight (more so when you cater i think), you don't get or at least don't see the rewards.
This comment sums it up very well.
 

DeletedUser2630

Guest
I have already solved the problem with the exponential for the developers. I'm just waiting for the team to find a replacement for me.
So that they don't lose the golden tower. I will fanatically click on something else :D

2020-07-31_221836.png
 

PaNonymeB

Well-Known Member
There was nothing secret about the differences in the squad size in the tournament.
The info about old squad size calculation isn't in-game nor in wiki (unless I missed something). Thus I consider it as quite secret.
The reason why old squad size formula is more known than the new one is because it's older, and easier to figure out. Not because it's less secret IMO.
 

WolfSinger

Well-Known Member
I saw someone mention subtracting the chapter the player is in from the AW level to determine how the AWs factor into the tournament formula. I don't think this is the correct way to do it either.

INNO is trying to scale the difficulty and squad sizes based on player progress and trying to limit the folks who pushed much further than they anticipated they - kinda like the orc barrier when exploring the map.

I would suggest instead of the simplistic method of substracting chapter level from AW level so a level 16 Thermal Spring in Chapter 16 would have no effect on the formula - instead the subtraction is based on the chapter difference on when the AW became available. So that same level 16 Thermal Spring which became available in Chapter 15 - would still count as 15 levels in the formula.

A bit more complicated in the programming perhaps - but it would target those that have moved well beyond where ever it is the devs seem to think we should be - but still encourage growth.
 

Steelhail

Member
1) I still like my suggestion of one free premium expansion per chapter and then reducing what they add to the formula from 0.75 of an expansion to 0.50, and making all of the AW levels to a person's chapter level free. It takes away the penalty for long time players and it also addresses the concern about staying in a low level and just concentrating on a few AWs and becoming too powerful. Some are suggesting a fixed number of levels per chapter, but that does allow a lower level player to focus on just a few AWs and not have them count and the AW penalty remains excessively steep. Compare the chapter 8 and the chapter 16 players who both work on say 4 AWs for troops and both prioritize them to level 30. The lower level player would need to advance to get the same number of free levels as the more advanced player, and I thought encouraging advancement was a goal.
I think the core idea of connecting AW cost to chapter is a good one, but I think there'd be a big equity issue if it's just subtracted from your current chapter. At the moment, there can be a player in chapter 8 who has a level 21 golden abyss, while another has a level 7 sanctuary, a level 7 GA, and a level 7 needles. To introduce a change that suddenly meant the latter player has no additional cost but the level 21 GA does would create issues ("it's not fair, I can't lower my GA levels, now I'm penalized until chapter 21 comes out!" ). if instead you told both players they get the tournament cost lowered by 20 AW levels (or whatever) in whatever ratio they chose when they enter chapter 8, they're encouraged to progress through chapters to reduce AW cost and keep freedom of choice.

Another good reason for something reducing a tournament cost by chapter is that INNO could communicate the expected AW balance per chapter so players don't get hurt later. When I first started playing, I assumed that I was supposed to rush through tech as quickly as possible, because that's "progress," right? If I'd kept that up, the sudden divine seeds costs would have blindsided me, and it could have taken a lot of time investment to fix that balancing.
 

Lovec Krys

Well-Known Member
Last time I checked spire and tournament were running mostly simultaniously. So why can't you use the temp. buildings for both?
Because they are each week and temp. buildings are too scarse to be used every week. And not enough troop production for both Spire & Tourney for me (on week basis), so fighting in tourney and negotiate Spire is my current strategy.

@ExplorerFfff Sorry to read that, but I understand. More quits will follows (not me this time).
 

ErestorX

Well-Known Member
I would suggest instead of the simplistic method of substracting chapter level from AW level so a level 16 Thermal Spring in Chapter 16 would have no effect on the formula - instead the subtraction is based on the chapter difference on when the AW became available. So that same level 16 Thermal Spring which became available in Chapter 15 - would still count as 15 levels in the formula.
How would this help? I regret having built the thermal springs because of the current penalties here on beta and I would still regret having built the thermal springs if the penalty is adjusted to anything >0. Even golden abyss and mountain halls currently have no value for me anymore therefore any penalty would mean that I would be better of without this type of wonder.

The only type that I would like to get rid of with the current system here on beta that could be saved by adjusted penalties are troop producing wonders without a strong secondary effect. They do increase troop production after all, but for cities with extremely high troop production like mine they currently cost more troops than they produce because of the higher troop size they cause.
 

Enevhar Aldarion

Well-Known Member
Apart the 3 AWs that speed production, Simia, Vallorian Valors and "Strategist Terrains", are there ore ways to increment troop production? Thank you :)
The two AWs that increase training size. Level those up with the three that speed up production time and you will make a lot of troops quickly.
 

ErestorX

Well-Known Member
Apart the 3 AWs that speed production, Simia, Vallorian Valors and "Strategist Terrains", are there ore ways to increment troop production?
Brown bears and time boosters. And the shrooms with enough armories to allow you to feed your brown bear(s) everytime before you collect your troops.
 

spennyit

Well-Known Member
Thank you for the answers :) BTW, Bulwark and Shrooms do not produce more units since also the time to produce a squad goes up :-( The per day squad average will remain the same :-(
 

Pauly7

Well-Known Member
Even golden abyss and mountain halls currently have no value for me anymore therefore any penalty would mean that I would be better of without this type of wonder.
I've considered this too. If these changes stand I can see a lot of ranking points going down because the people that can bring themselves to do it will be just deleting Ancient Wonders that are hurting them. In my Live city I have so much excess population and T1-T3 goods that I too will be better deleting those two AWs. I also may be better served to delete my level 31 Needles and then build it back up to, say level 16 (same goes for any high level Wonders) and then experiment with gradually increasing the ones where it makes sense to do so.

The Ancient Wonder system is such a good and important facet of this game. Apart from undoing players' hard work time and (sometimes) money on these buildings, they will eventually be reduced to a much more minor role. We will be advising new players to think carefully about building any Wonder. It's a real shame. Several of them will never be being built at all.