Alliance Wars Early Access

[WORM]

i agree with everything said AW is turning to **** no 1 cares about it at this point cause it isn't even that fun either seriously fix it up or get rid of it completely it!

also can the devs reply in the forums they r getting more and more lazy as more and more bugs come in to the game

[hrms]

Even if that's it, I consider Alliance War a positive addition.

But really, there's a lot of room for improvement.

I wonder if it took two years to do that. Or if you have more ready to be added as soon as that part stabilizes. (I confess I know nothing about programming)

Anyway, I don't see why adding something so important without some kind of open discussion with the players. I think that would increase the chances of getting it right.

Considering how things are usually done, it's actually a little frustrating to think about improvements, as they either won't be heard, or it will take a long time to get ready.

For me, the AW is an 8/10.

[leroy]

i agree with everything said AW is turning to **** no 1 cares about it at this point cause it isn't even that fun either seriously fix it up or get rid of it completely it!

The whole point of early access for alliance wars was to get feedback to help tweak it to make it more fun and work out the bugs. It isn't officially 'part of the game' yet, it is a work in progress.

also can the devs reply in the forums they r getting more and more lazy as more and more bugs come in to the game

Oh please.

leroy

[leroy]

Even if that's it, I consider Alliance War a positive addition.

But really, there's a lot of room for improvement.

I wonder if it took two years to do that. Or if you have more ready to be added as soon as that part stabilizes. (I confess I know nothing about programming)

Anyway, I don't see why adding something so important without some kind of open discussion with the players. I think that would increase the chances of getting it right.

Considering how things are usually done, it's actually a little frustrating to think about improvements, as they either won't be heard, or it will take a long time to get ready.

For me, the AW is an 8/10.

This is your chance for that open discussion. Again, this is early access and AW is not officially part of the game yet. Your alliance leader had to apply to get into this feature. So yes, improvement ideas will be heard. As such, some ideas are fantastic and we will be adding them. And frankly, some ideas are terrible and we won't. And honestly the one thing I've learned over these many years is no matter how amazing a feature might be according to the general player-base, there will always be some players who very vocally thinks it is terrible. You can't please everyone, but we do our best.

leroy

[Kupo]

This is your chance for that open discussion. Again, this is early access and AW is not officially part of the game yet. Your alliance leader had to apply to get into this feature. So yes, improvement ideas will be heard. As such, some ideas are fantastic and we will be adding them. And frankly, some ideas are terrible and we won't. And honestly the one thing I've learned over these many years is no matter how amazing a feature might be according to the general player-base, there will always be some players who very vocally thinks it is terrible. You can't please everyone, but we do our best.

leroy

If it's alright to ask, how long is the beta expected to last for? I think epopel are more worried if it's going to spend years in it again, or we end up with something that's far less rewarding than already is worth.

[leroy]

If it's alright to ask, how long is the beta expected to last for? I think epopel are more worried if it's going to spend years in it again, or we end up with something that's far less rewarding than already is worth.

I would say we'd like to get it out to the general public as quickly as we think we can get it ready when it is a place where most people are generally happy with how it works and plays. (Note that comments along the lines of "make it better it really sux and noone likes it" are completely worthless.)

The goals are/were generally:
- Allow alliance players to work together to climb alliance ranks
- Provide a new and unique way of playing the game (currently in the form of allowing mixed pantheons and attacking damaged cities)
- Provide some amount of alliance-level strategy to attack enemies (currently in the form of which cities to attack and by whom)
- Provide a way for players to level up more quickly (but not too quickly!)
- Do something unique and more fun than other alliance-type wars in our genre
- Do not do anything which could cause alliances to be easily ripped apart due to in-fighting

And of course we do not want to release to the general public without fixing all the bugs. Frankly, there are lots currently and we are working through them. (And again, that is why it is considered early access and it isn't open to general public). We can also add more features after it is released. For example, I very much like the idea of war alliance chat suggested earlier, but it might not make the first public war version.

leroy

[Kane2]

I think limiting the players who can attack in a war to a certain number (30/40/50] would fix a lot of complaints quite easily. First 30 to attack would always go for the highest stars, even smaller alliances would have a chance of ranking higher, the whole alliance gets to boost rewards.

[Raphasifiout]

I think the way hero return for next game if academy stands is really nice. It gives importance for players to protect academy

[Columbo]

Hi all,

I report a very strange behavior.
A player has left an alliance but has his city in the war list. He goes to another alliance.
the city which is at war in the first alliance can be attacked (ok it's normal) but.. it seems players of his new alliance can see the attack (like a normal attack) and can help to defend.

[WORM]

leroy
sos I prob was a bit blunt,
I realise codding is a time consuming and frustrating job
I do a bit myself
it just seemed like for over a week every 1 was complaining bout bugs and how 2 work around them and u wernt replying.

also after seeing ur last messagemessagesome ideas r being put into play. hopefully it improves :/

[Jay]

1.The stars seem very off in today’s war between Athena’s acolytes and God’s United. A level 124 base is worth 120+ stars for AA and a similar base in GU is worth ~25 stars.
1a. Members are now able to attack bases that were previously won.

Hi Jbm and anyone who has noticed that War Star distributions were too heavily weighted toward the higher level bases -- we have tried to smooth this out with a new formula, since we agree it was too extreme. In particular, you would see a level 124 (for example) valued far, FAR more than a level 100 base.

This has been in place the last couple of Wars, and is in place going forward. Please let us know how these distributions are looking now! The difference should be less harsh now.

Note that these values are based on total Stone (or Obsidian for Underworld) that the player has in their City and Wallet combined. So a person who has a lot of res in their wallet but doesn't spend it on their city will still be worth a lot of War Stars. (And make a great target for attackers!)

[Lestorm]

Hi Jbm and anyone who has noticed that War Star distributions were too heavily weighted toward the higher level bases -- we have tried to smooth this out with a new formula, since we agree it was too extreme. In particular, you would see a level 124 (for example) valued far, FAR more than a level 100 base.

This has been in place the last couple of Wars, and is in place going forward. Please let us know how these distributions are looking now! The difference should be less harsh now.

Note that these values are based on total Stone (or Obsidian for Underworld) that the player has in their City and Wallet combined. So a person who has a lot of res in their wallet but doesn't spend it on their city will still be worth a lot of War Stars. (And make a great target for attackers!)

note that these values are based on total store, Saul Goodman(26 star) ..aboc(21star)...littlebike (18 star) and shadow(22 star) sorry geai error...

[Andreac]

This happened today, where she was dead, but in gods of Olympus limbo. Not able to drop or do anything with her.

[Andreac]

I think from our groups perspective we have about 1/2 that are participating in alliance wars, some have a language barrier that can’t understand, some are bored and don’t want to anymore, some find rewards lacking. The level 60 and under get frustrated as they only get 1 star per attack, and they see us over 100 getting 20 or more each attack. If there was a more even way, like ow bases are all worth the same, uw too, maybe we would have more participation. If we could limit the players in the war and select when we attack it would be much better too. I keep telling them it’s just daily for now as we are testing, but atm it’s so much more work on some of us just to get people to attack there. 25-40 players would be perfect, it would be nice to have some sort of feature or god or something that’s unique in attacks only to alliance wars as well. Right now not much difference than reg attacks. I know you can mix gods around, but you get over that. Also it would be so good to have the ability to flag in aw attacks. Ty

[Antares]

Jay leroy Two things I‘d like to raise

1) war history
The Battle history for a certain Player in a certain war shows the defenses under attack not the attacks

2) match making
even though this is early Access I‘d like to let you know we‘ve got multiple times the same Opponent the next day or shortly after. I guess this should be prevented also when it‘s live for all