About the scaling of costs (not about the changes made on catering and fighting) :
I think this outrage you're referring to is mostly caused by assumptions about the difficulty formula that are not correct, which is logical since we're not able to share the exact formula.
Rethinking of it, I think it might actually be our assumptions about how Inno wants to balance the game that are not correct, which would be logical since they're possibly lying (one more time) about it.
- Either they want tournaments to be available for everyone no matter of their progress. Then Tournament performances mainly depends of what we choose to put in our city rather than in our progress. This means, a city that doesn't focus in Tournaments exclusively will have a harder time in Tournaments than a city that does, even if the first one is higher advanced.
- Or they want tournaments to reward progress, and thus make so that an advanced city can do much more tournaments than a beginner/mid-game city.
We assumed the latter as it's what they said in the announcement : "while the progression in the Tournaments becomes more costly as your city grows over time, the increase is nowhere near the amount of resources the progressed city will be able to produce extra thanks to the progress made.", but let's assume the former. After all, they also said :
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.
When they said it, I pointed out that
This is a contradiction... if you're making cost proportional to production, then progression gives you as much benefit as negative effects, not more.
In other words, one of the quotes was wrong, and we assumed the wrong one was this sentence quoted above in the middle of a long post :
I believe you used simple numbers for the sake of simplicity, but I'd like to confim:
Player B should pay ~1800 crystals, not 2,000, right? Because you still want to reward progress and "Progression should always give you more benefit than the negative impact it has on difficulty "
The goal is not to make it "relatively just as challenging", is it?
But I think they really meant Player B should pay 2000, and they actually lied in the announcement. Else, why would they have ever made tournament costs depending on the city ? Even before the changes, they made Tournament costs increasing with chapter progress by linking them with squad size, to ensure that players from all chapters roughly have the same difficulty to get the resources needed for the tournament. But, squad size didn't estimate overall city progress very well, as two cities with the same progress could have very different tournament costs depending on optional squad size upgrades they took, and it didn't take into account important parts of progress which are AWs and expansions from map scouting (which are even the only thing that make yor city progress past end-game). So they improved the formula, and the new formula actually works well, giving numbers close to squad size for most of cities and better estimating power of very powerful cities like
@CrazyWizard's. And taking into account wonders that doesn't help with tournament is fine too : you choose which wonders you level, if you focus on ranking points you could level Thrones that will on the other side make your tournaments harder than some who focused on Tournaments and leveled Monastery instead, even if you have more overall AW levels :
This I already explained :
About how the formula should be reworked :
We can approximate the total production of a city by B×Q×E where B = 1+production boost, E = number of expansions, and Q = base production per square. Q is depending on chapter progress (unlocking upgrades) and AW levels (allowing cheaper upgrades, better production,...). And the AW power acts mostly as a multiplicator (as most of AW powers are calculated as a % of something which increases as you advance.) So the multiplication of factors is not what's wrong with this formula.
The first issue is that Q doesn't grow exponentially with chapter. Actually it looks closer to linear. (Else the B×Q×E would have grown much faster than the former squad size roughly proprtional to Chapter^2.)
Thus a (1+Boost)×f(Techs)×(1+x×AW levels)×Expansions sounds right to estimate production of a city if AW are well balanced (although the f(Techs) shouldn't be exponential, or productions should be rebalanced). And if AW are not well balanced, the problem doesn't come from the formula. And about "end-chain" AWs that give e.g. KP or ranking points and doesn't help tournaments, they give the rewards you'd lose due to tournament costs increased, so it sounds right to put them into the tournament cost formula considering INNO's goals. (Although the ×Expansions doesn't work well with fighting, as you can't use a lot of your city space to produce troops.)
So, if they lied about their intentions and actually don't want progress to help much in Spire/Tournaments, then the scaling of Spire/Tournament costs is well-balanced. Else they'd better make costs not depending on city at all.