• 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!

[Tournaments] Reduce Tournament encounters

Are you in favor of this idea?


  • Total voters
    76
  • Poll closed .

palmira

Well-Known Member
12 fightable and 4 not fightable encounters would become 3 fightable and 1 not fightable province. No difference in goods for negotiate in average.
And stop comparing this suggestion with spire that have x100 times bigger squad sizes and multiple waves.
That's your opinion; I have mine. I supported my opinion on the facts available to me, being different from yours is not a basis for ordering me to stop expressing my opinion. Let's keep this civil, will we? This is a poll where people vote according to what they think will be the end result, it is not a forum to bully people to vote according to your wishes.
 

Karvest

Well-Known Member
I can only quote myself
It's sad that some players vote against just because they don't trust Inno to change anything without making things worse...
Did it became worse at previous time, when they changed from 8 encounters to 4? Why do you think it would be worse now? Especially as worse as in spire?
 
Last edited:

CrazyWizard

Well-Known Member
The main argument is that tourney takes too much time now, comparing with the times when it was introduced. And there is not really a big difference in loses between doing 100 small encounters and 25 big encounters except the time wasted on it.
For me, using only autocombat, it is a bad direction. If it is only one fight I can loose 4 times more troops in one fight. based on bad battle field enviroment or wrong chosen troop composition.

A big NO, please not
Your losses would be the same as in 4 bad battlefield environments now. And that 4 bad environments are really happening now, since you have to fight 4x more battles. No difference tournament-wise.
Bot really if you have 4 battles and 1 outcome is bad, the othert 3 battles even out the odds.
If you have 1 battle compromising those 4 battles and the outcome goed awry you lose a
Yes Elvenstats does give Tournament stats, updated constantly. But the Leader Board should really be in-game - the way they do with Fellowship Rankings in Fellowship Adventures.
And there should be some Instants, ranking points and buildings given to the top hundred fellowships, just like FA. Teleports and Genies, for example, would give everyone an incentive to work harder!!
:)
Lol that would be great since my main accounts guild was an early adopter of the tournaments, as a result we in general are way way way ahead in scoring of the other guilds, so you would give me free goodies.
to be fair, we don't really need guild leaderboards for that, for those who like that elvenstats already does that for us, so there is not much reason for elvenar to spend precious development time on such a feature while there a dozen more promenent things to be done first like for example fix the cross tier trade issue.

A big YES as far as I'm concerned, allowing either to save a huge amount of time across my different cities
or alternatively to switch back to manual mode to optimize the outcome (which I had to stop by lack of time)
No one forces you to play a dozen accounts, As long as you play one the current format is fine. we already had the time reduced when we went from 8 to 4 battles. as a result we started to do a lot more provinces instead.
 

Milton

Member
oh gosh, I didn't noticed the poll was closed.. mmm anyway I would have voted a yes. The statistically difficult would not increase. Just to make a numeric example for the ones who still hadn't get it.
Let's assume that we statistically lose 1 squad per encounter, based obviously on the features of the units in a specific tournament:
4 encounter mode (i.e. 100 units per squad):
1st encounter: 1 squad = 100 units lost
2nd encounter: 1 squad = 100 units lost
3rd encounter: 1 squad = 100 units lost
4th encounter: 1 squad = 100 units lost
total lost = 400 units
1 encounter mode (proportional change to 400 units per squad):
1 single encounter: 1 squad = 400 units lost
total lost = still 400 units
This is true if we compare the two modes in an only fight strategy, and the same result would be in an only catering strategy.

But if we want, in a 4 enc. mode, make 2 fighting and 2 catering or 1 fighting and 3 catering and so on, the outcome of goods/units losses would be different between the two modes (the 1 enc. mode would offer a single global possibility), and so the two tota losses would be incomparable.
Now I would suggest, if it's possible, to make this reduction Optional, just because there is a reduction in tactical choices.
I think this change is a very good idea but should be an option for every province, maybe selectable through a check ("reducing" or something like this) for each province in the main window of the tournament.
example.jpg
 

Karvest

Well-Known Member
But if we want, in a 4 enc. mode, make 2 fighting and 2 catering or 1 fighting and 3 catering and so on, the outcome of goods/units losses would be different between the two modes (the 1 enc. mode would offer a single global possibility), and so the two tota losses would be incomparable.
If you look at the whole tourney, you would still can do 50% fighting and 50% catering or 25% fighting and 75% catering and so on, and loses would be comparable.
 

Milton

Member
If you look at the whole tourney, you would still can do 50% fighting and 50% catering or 25% fighting and 75% catering and so on, and loses would be comparable.
Ok thank you for this because I just realised one thing, that I did wrong in the first part of the post and actually had changed my idea. It could also be that my brain is collapsing and if so, please tell me with a founded explanation o_O
But now let me explain... my previous assumption "let's assume that we have a 1 squad loss per encounter" is something that is true only if we make an infinite tournament. But the tournaments we do are finite, with a finite number of encounter and a precise number of losses of units and goods. So the comparison would give quite the same results only if we deal with many encounters. But many. And this makes the difference. What I am saying is that the 1 encounters system is against his same idea of statistically replacing the 4 encounters mode, just because the encounters, even if balanced with the previous system, are less than before.
Let's say we make 10 provinces 5 stars. In the 1 encounter system they are 50. In the 4 enc. system they are 200. Statistically the latter is stronger! So it is not an advantage to make less encounters even if they are obviously balanced in term of goods/squadsize, just because probability distribution is in disfavour: with less encounters there are 1/4 possibilities less of choosing the right way to face up the encounters. The global appearence of the troops types would be far from the p.d.f. intended for that tourney because of 1/4 reduction of cases.
This is important, because it's not the same probability/statistic question of opening the chests in the events. There you have no choices in the middle between offer and result.
When we have a single encounter of a specific tourney we make a choice using our resources to minimize the damage. Because of this conditioning, the final summation upon a number of provinces is different from a simple ideal summation of theoric losses based on some p.d.f., which instead would allow a change from 4 to 1 enc mode.
Don't know if had been clear. Please be careful before making this thing. I hope that, if this idea will at the end come out, at least could be optional.
 
Last edited:

Karvest

Well-Known Member
That's the listed downside, if you are still learning - the cost of the lessons rises up. For those who are playing tourneys for years, and/or doing much more than 10 provinces costs would be ~ same, but amount of time spent on clicking would be much less. And time is a much more valuable resource for many players.
Optional "reduce tournament encounters" tech in the tree would resolve this issue - newbies would have enough time to learn with many encounters and when grow up - switch to less time consuming setup.
But any kind of "player selectable" encounter amount may lead to broken "tourney encounter" quests, so should be done very carefully.
 

Scoobydoo

Forum Moderator
Elvenar Team
I do not see where you are going with this.... If you have no challenge and just get what you want, won't you then say 'there is no challenge, so I'll leave'.
There is a challenge and you want it taken away. If there is no 'game play' then what are we looking for.
Surely there has to be effort put in for the reward or it surely has to be boredom... Just throwing in a conumdrum isn't it???
 

Milton

Member
I think that it would be different even for a person who does more than 10 provinces. In the 20th province you will find a 4 time more squadsize than the own "tech tree" squadsize, and you could have a disfavouring troops distribution that would lead you to cater an amount of goods you could have not spent in a previous 4 enc in the same province, where maybe would have had 3 encounters in favour where to loose irrilevant number of troops and only 1 where to loose goods. It's only a possible case, but it is relevant to have 4 more possibilites instead of 1 in a very high province were you could loose 4 times more. Even if it was 400 cases, they are still less than 1600.
Yes, a giant city with millions of possibility could easily face up to similar quantities/tipes-of-resources problems in any way. But there are also many long-term players who don't do so many provinces and they would enter in a statistical sfavour.
And yes, as the time saving is also a crucial point, I still suggest that this reduction should be left as a possibility...
But any kind of "player selectable" encounter amount may lead to broken "tourney encounter" quests, so should be done very carefully.
this could be bypassed simply asking for a tournament province request instead of single enc.s

Edit. Scoobydoo, I don't get what you are talking about. I'm not talking about boring and challenge , I'm simply saying that the two modes are not statistically comparable and replacable as intended. But I understand that there are also players (maybe even me in live) who can face up easily with their amount of resources and would save up time with the 1 enc. way. So why don't we simply put this change as an option?
 
Last edited:

Karvest

Well-Known Member
There is a challenge and you want it taken away.
There is no challenge in spending hours on clicking same buttons. Challenge should be in getting enough resources via proper design of your city/selecting proper troops/wise manual fighting/etc.
In the 20th province you will find a 4 time more squadsize than the own "tech tree" squadsize, and you could have a disfavouring troops distribution that would lead you to cater an amount of goods you could have not spent in a previous 4 enc in the same province, where maybe would have had 3 encounters in favour where to lose irrilevant number of troops and only one to lose goods.
But then you can have 3 provinces with "easy" setups and spend even less resources for catering overall than in 4 old style provinces in a row with one "hard" encounter per province. That's just a matter of luck.
But there are also many long-term players who don't do so many provinces
And many of them do it just because they have no time to do more.
 

Milton

Member
But then you can have 3 provinces with "easy" setups and spend even less resources for catering overall than in 4 old style provinces in a row with one "hard" encounter per province. That's just a matter of luck.
Well, your example could have the same value even comparing one easy-setup-province with the same old style province with 1 hard enc, don't understand why 3 :D, anyway... The point is that:
1 new bad enc = 4 old bad enc.
1 new good enc = 4 old good enc
there is no space for combination. And also are not so frequent this black/white situations in the 4 enc mode.
If you are in a very high province it is enough a bad one to have a significant loss of one single type of resource and it is not comparable to the old case where the layout could be of every type and you can have resources losses differently distributed between soldiers and goods. Still in a high province, in the example you said, that one hard encounter goods lost is not relevant like a corresponding new one request, because is 1/4 lighter, saving on the other hand ~1/4 of the soldiers that would be lost in the new single good enc., according to the right proportions. This different distributions can make the difference if the squadsize is 8 times your normal one and a single request of goods is like catering the whole old style province.
Just coming to the end: the 2 layouts are different and if this will be introduced I strongly wish an option check in the window, so everyone could enjoy the tournament.
 
Last edited:

Richord

Well-Known Member
i'm not going to do the math, and won't take these half-true's for facts, not in a hundred years.
more fights=more possibilities with years of experience to do well, meaning; doing better than average.
I'm not in the top100 pretty much every week with limited time and growing unit stack for nothing.
My tactical choices are an advantage that will be taken away by a silly change of the game like this.
 

CrazyWizard

Well-Known Member
There is no challenge in spending hours on clicking same buttons. Challenge should be in getting enough resources via proper design of your city/selecting proper troops/wise manual fighting/etc.

But then you can have 3 provinces with "easy" setups and spend even less resources for catering overall than in 4 old style provinces in a row with one "hard" encounter per province. That's just a matter of luck.

And many of them do it just because they have no time to do more.
Where does it end? forget battles all together just sink in the recources instead? after all there is always another way to reduce the time.
Yes it's a recource management thing, and I am pretty good at it I think.

But, the last time we got a reduction in encounters people started to do more, they neven decreased there tournament time, they just did more either on the same account or with multiple accounts.

Assuming you get what you want, a simple reduction in encounters without a rebalance like for example the spire (which is a fata morgana to think that would be the case, we always get what we want with a twist we hate) as a result would people actually spend less time at the tournaments?
most likely not.

with the introduction of timewarp and polar bear we already have options now to create your own timetable to play the tournaments.
And I would not mind switching that wonder with another one in the earlier chapter for that reason. that was an excellent change for every player who has access to it.

I am a competitive player, and I hate to see the tournaments turn into a must do manual battle thing to win. then recource management is no longer be the case. but again how much time you a re willing to spend at it.
This is already the case at steel tournaments where the biggest battle is who has the most aviable provinces and how much time can I sink into it.
once every 9 weeks is as much as I can take, I love my autocombat, it keeps me sane. after a week of steel tournaments I am exhausted.

as a side effect this also increases the gap between PC and mobile players, as the mobile app has no manual mode and since you are trying to kill autocombat for mobile competitive play (dont forget this is where tournaments earn there money, joe average spends no dime on 8 tournament provincies) the gap becomes huge as again the top will be dominated by manual battles a thing mobile players can't compete at unless that's developed for the mobile version.
 

Karvest

Well-Known Member
Well, I don't play tournaments in a competitive way, I just use them to get resources I need to build my city (KPs/RRs/spells/blueprints), and never even try doing 6* on 10+ provinces as it is a waste of resources for me. And I don't play manual fights either, since it takes too much time even with autocombat. And I'm pretty sure I would continue playing auto for most if not for all provinces in tourney with reduced encounters. My wife would do the same (and get more points overall with less time spent), and I think a lot of players too.
If you compare your own scores from 1.5 years ago and now (with the same tournament rules) - you are spending almost double amount of time now due to all those boosts Inno added since then.
 

Brummbaer

Well-Known Member
Dear Karvest,
I have a look at my average and points since april 2018, nearly the same :) some spiked out by no real increasement.
I do not have enough troops to fight more
 

Marindor

Community Manager
Elvenar Team
Hi guys, thank you all for voting. Since multi accounts were used to push these percentages over the 80% treshold and without them, it would be below 80%, unfortunately this idea didn't get enough support to be forwarded. It will now be archived :)