My opinion is that there are things that have improved the game but many things that have made the game worse.
If I have to choose between "yes or no" my vote is No.

seems the updates favor multi accounts and big spenders. There are players who have been here for years but Admin does not seem to care that the unfairness of the game is chasing them out. Money, money ,money seems to be all that counts.

you should make a list to vote for every part of the updates which were made over the last months. Because there were good updates and some which were not that good.

for example the military ranking:

show me your solution to save small players (around 3mrd points) from beeing attacked by player with 100x more troops/points.

the vote is ok but you should also tell what should be improved.

Quote from pairsn

for example the military ranking:

show me your solution to save small players (around 3mrd points) from beeing attacked by player with 100x more troops/points.

100x more troops? This is not possible.

Otherwise, you can send support troops.

The problem is not that some players leave the game. It is normal. The problem is that there are only a few new players and most do not stay in the game long enough to really start playing and start loving the game like the veterans do.
So changes are needed.
Playing with bigpoint could be done without money. But you could be crushed by a player that played the game longer than you did, bought an account of another player or used bugtroops. And most of the old worlds were dead and the other were dying. If you did not have more than 1 kingdom and lost a war, you had to rebuild for years before you could really play the game again. I knew a lot of players that quite and did not rebuild. I also know players that came back later and started a new kingdom. They could not find a game that gave them what Damoria gave them.
Now with BitMeUp and all the changes you can still play the game without spending money. Players that pay more get shortcuts and their kingdoms get bigger and have more troops quicker.( there are also events and mage were you can get or win the benefits that you normally have to buy) the Players that played longer or in more of the old worlds are much bigger, with extreme more troops. But Bugs and multies are actively contested. You can prevent being completely destroyed ( surrender option). Rebuilding after war-damage goes quicker as the construction wagons give bigger castles. Starting members have much quicker a full functioning kingdom. And you can no longer be attacked by those that are way out of your reach. Attacking a smaller players for booty or punishment without losing something yourself is no longer possible. And as a smaller player you can attack equal opponents.
So i think the changes are a good start. Some might need a bit of shaving to get even better, but Dschibait and his crew are listening to suggestions we players make. And that is so much more than we had in the old worlds.

Quote from Caligula

100x more troops? This is not possible.

It was possible before the changes.

JUFLO, I disagree.
The military ladder has a bad calculation.
It can take 50 new castles in the carriage business and can attack the small players who have 1000 times fewer troops.
Mag - one who has money can buy 100,000,000,000 troops. I counted it! If you have a 25x FULL castle, you will be producing troops for 8 years. Is it fair-play when you can buy it in 50 days ??? Now, no matter how long you play. Now everything is decided by money and multi-accounts.
Other updates are fine.

Quote from Kral_Medvidek_K

JUFLO, I disagree.
The military ladder has a bad calculation.
It can take 50 new castles in the carriage business and can attack the small players who have 1000 times fewer troops.
Mag - one who has money can buy 100,000,000,000 troops. I counted it! If you have a 25x FULL castle, you will be producing troops for 8 years. Is it fair-play when you can buy it in 50 days ??? Now, no matter how long you play. Now everything is decided by money and multi-accounts.
Other updates are fine.

Nobody can buy 100,000,000,000 troops here. For this you would have to invest 100,000,000,000 EUR (or more). That's impossible! Or does someone have so much money here?

I think you can buy Damoria for so much money.

Sorry, but your extrapolation is incorrect!

Quote from Caligula

Nobody can buy 100,000,000,000 troops here. For this you would have to invest 100,000,000,000 EUR (or more). That's impossible! Or does someone have so much money here?
I think you can buy Damoria for so much money.

Sorry, but your extrapolation is incorrect!

Someone tried it with 100 gold: You can get 40 spells for 100 gold. You can get some 250.000 troops in about 10 spells. ( 25.000 average the spell) To get 100.000.000.000 troops you need about 40kk mage spells; This will cost you a repetitive strain injury and about 100kk gold. There have been some events you got spells when buying stuff. But more troops give only higher mil. points and tougher opponents.
If a player of the opposite alliance has lots of small castles, he has trouble to defend them. In war time it could be wise to spent some deeds on those castles just to get this player out of your range. And the castle will lower your mil.points also, so it is a double sided sword. And besides before the changes you could be attacked by all players. So this is a improvement. Besides small castles become bigger and sending carriages will cost more and more gems. And with the max of 120 castles the options are limited.

Quote from Juflo

Someone tried it with 100 gold: You can get 40 spells for 100 gold. You can get some 250.000 troops in about 10 spells. ( 25.000 average the spell) To get 100.000.000.000 troops you need about 40kk mage spells; This will cost you a repetitive strain injury and about 100kk gold. There have been some events you got spells when buying stuff. But more troops give only higher mil. points and tougher opponents.If a player of the opposite alliance has lots of small castles, he has trouble to defend them. In war time it could be wise to spent some deeds on those castles just to get this player out of your range. And the castle will lower your mil.points also, so it is a double sided sword. And besides before the changes you could be attacked by all players. So this is a improvement. Besides small castles become bigger and sending carriages will cost more and more gems. And with the max of 120 castles the options are limited.

Ok, 40,000,000 spells.

40,000,000 spells / 300 spells each 150 € Gold Package = 133,333 packages

133,333 x 150 € = 20,000,000 €

But at an event! Without an event, 40,000,000 spells would cost at least 10,000,000,000 €

That's crazy. Nobody will invest so much money in a game!

really guys? damoria external users try to subvert the survey in that way?

do you think you can constrain the administration to cancel the whole update?

i read the most entries last days and i am wondering about some user who play Damoria at all.

1.step: cry for changes otherwise Damoria will die in bordedom
2.step: updates with changes are realized and applause for that
3.step: realize that changes doesn´t bring 100% positive changes, maybe some negative effects
or restrictions come with it too.
4.step: cry "updates are unfair and shit" and what ever
5.step: survey-manipulations

maybe i step back in Damoria and make a movie for that and call it "the update conspiracy"

i honestly respect that for some players the update have more positive effects than for other players and some are not happy with that. but what shall we do?
discuss for next 50 years to find a update constellation which bring happiness to 99,99% of Damoria players...and damn i forgot...for the external who participate in the survey too...we shall not forget they have to get positive effects in a game they do not play!?

i think some of us forgot that administration react with updates because of our intentions. some of these updates were not what we want...yes...but now we have a level of discussions and insults against Dschibait, 08/15 and the admin staff. and for that niveau i ask myself:
"how many times does you run against a wall with your heads" to act like that?"

i am sorry but i cannot understand this...maybe i don´t want to.

Hi,

I did not want to write but I do it as I sometimes watch the forum...

Many changes were necessary and ok.

I do not vote here.

But some money related changes have hurt some hearts.

First for the future you may think about :

1.step: remove the VS accounts older then 56 days...
2.step: identify and remove pure proxy and multi accounts attacking real and fair players involved in a combined attack/support situation.
There must be some sort of verification possible? see also agreement from last year (Datenschutzverordnung and AGB)
3.
Now It is possible that a player raises a wall from 0 to 100 a few times in a row in an excessive way while poorer gamer cannot do it. Do you not see an issue here? I know that money is needed to keep everything running but some excessive golden boys are way too crazy hehe. I do not state names here.

there could be some sort of cooldown for usage of gold?but I am not sure about this idea...

Regards
Phil