@vanmorris all changes are not good for you. you are always criticizing everything. Nothing suits you. Think about it sometimes before you write something.
when are new changes are I wait just when you give a message in forum

Ole again, more changes, that is, in the end we all capitulate and leave the game, that we will do.
We will do as all those who have cried do to do it.

Quote from Jendrzej1

@vanmorris all changes are not good for you. you are always criticizing everything. Nothing suits you. Think about it sometimes before you write something.
when are new changes are I wait just when you give a message in forum

How easy is it to talk when all the changes by grace have favored you, or not? I say for "the art of grace"

This changes are for all. For example this is good for kral medvidek with nato

Quote from Dschibait

we intorduce the capitulation update before your war here
https://board.bitmeup.com/inde…-and-Capitulation-Update/

and we already wrote to get as goal, to keep this player still in our game / in our community. Did you really want to loose the loosing players in last war ?
Players who spent money to get features, and a future, pay for servers etc ... players who want to fight, who want to play all your loved game..
I also would do that if NATO would lose a war, or KN or someone else .. that these mechanics to keep players are in first line for these players who lost and may will stop playing isn't a secret ... im not sure which steps you / or other players would go here ... but now, we have attractive the option to stay in game and come back.

No one argues about the intention and the inicial introduction... this thread is about the newest update which is giving unbalanced benefits... just do your maths (i gave you the elements for it in an earlier post)... WHY would an agressor have the benefit of 8.500.000.000 extra troops bonus because of a capitulation ?

Quote from Dschibait

i already put the math here but the team want to keep this math secret (you already see it in your other thread) ... so finally, i will talk with the team to get a midd way, that we can explain that this 2x troop production isn't such a benefit like you write here.

finally i already wrote it, at around place 120 in military ranking it starts to get a benefit if you have ANY pay feature enabled.

i cannot wait to see the explanation since the numbers i posted are based on the game settings... and sure you do not have to go into detail on mil ranking values... (i think with some clever excel analysis i can get close to it myself; but that is not the point)... fights are not being won or lost by points, albeit military or building rankings... they are determined by troops and that is the only thing that counts... and just there this last change is exagerative in the way it is done now. So i am very curious how you are going to explain where my calculation about the 8.500.000.000 bonus troops is wrong...

Quote from Dschibait

we intorduce the capitulation update before your war here
https://board.bitmeup.com/inde…-and-Capitulation-Update/

and we already wrote to get as goal, to keep this player still in our game / in our community. Did you really want to loose the loosing players in last war ?
Players who spent money to get features, and a future, pay for servers etc ... players who want to fight, who want to play all your loved game..
I also would do that if NATO would lose a war, or KN or someone else .. that these mechanics to keep players are in first line for these players who lost and may will stop playing isn't a secret ... im not sure which steps you / or other players would go here ... but now, we have attractive the option to stay in game and come back.

Hahaha You're saying you want to keep that player in the game, with the bennefits, But what about us? when other players had to capitulate, (me included) a few months ago, you didn't updated anything to help us! I gues we are not that important???

Quote from Dschibait

we need logs about what this capitulation brings or not ... We talked about different features like building-time reduction, troop speed, resource speed ... with your and also other cases we saw that the troop amount is the biggest problem to come back.
Sry, i know that for players like you who are the first in capitulation this isn't a good publishing interval ... but i hope that you see the updates still as good for anyone who needs to go the same way like you.

Yeah wright, but with your interfearing in the war, with the updates is Jendrzej the Alliance that get the most benefits, And they started the War with more alliances against one small one. And for the small Alliance you do nothing, So again we are not important!

Quote from Dschibait

take this math ... i didn't check it... but lets go for it:

ok, 17billion .. lets talk about the following points:

1. other players => other players can get the half amount in the same 6months interval. Means also around 8,5 billion. So finally we talk about a plus of 8.5 billion (the double factor).
If you want, i can put your daily build troops here - but your board nick is another as ingame, so im not sure if you want to keep that secret who you are ingame.
At all, you didn't get 1/3 of this value with a double speed at this moment in 6months - and you use some of our extras.

It is not specially about me (anyway you know me ;)), this is about the injust appropriation in general. What is happening here is that the attacker(s) who also lost a significant number of troops (we can see that in the hall of fame) and who cannot capitulate are being placed in a disadvantage since their recuperation leads to half number of troops regained compared to a capitulator (it costs troops to kill troops). With this comes the assumption that due to the military ranking and the limiting of 'targets' as well atacker as defender are in a comparable range before the capitulation. The risk of being first agressor is that you get paid and thus loose troops (that is a calculated risk based on the game specifics). Besides the grace period of 6 months to recuperate it is not bad to think about an accelerator but that should be in balance and not just based on feeling sorry someone lost a large amout of troops.

2. buildings and resources
beside the fact that you have to lose also building points means that you lose more building points as you only need to go into capitulation. maybe you will lose almost anything - you see the last capitulations they have big building / castles loses.
With these loses you have to build up again and also get a resource production back.
Sure you can do this with resources from your allies, but finally, you need a rly big amount of resources to get this numbers of troops.
I already wrote it, maybe we disable trade transactions in capitulation that you only can get resources by your own / the mage.

As others have already posted, the loss of building points can be 'managed' by handing over castles to other accounts, even those so small in military ranking that they cannot be attacked and are easy to defend since only small players are in the same military ranking zone. After dissolving the capitulation period one can easily get these castles back.

3. respect to the team and calculations
finally, we dosn't say, and that i already wrote, that there are still adjustments needed, so we need logs to see how this is working. Maybe we see in the next days already that its rly to much, that we decrease it to only 20% extra or so... but at this moment, we want to have a feature that can hold players.

It s not just about holding players isn t it ? It s about keeping the PAYING players.... anyway of course everyone understands that this game needs income to keep it alive... but that should in my opinion also be balanced and righteous to everyone. The veterans (like myself too) know the game and know how to play it.

beside that fact, yes you bring contra against that feature, at all, yes im on the trip to get feedback with suggestions ... this is maybe a false way i should'nt go, but think about it, should i take your feedback here as sirious as other who may provide me suggestions what should be changed/adjusted?

... then to contribute to a solution... at this moment the military ranking does not make a real distinction between 'troops present' and 'troop building capacity'. What i mean to say is that if one plays for a long time one can have a lot of troops but one might not yet have 25 full production castles. That means that the effect of a significant loss has a bigger impact on those who have not 25 full production castles. If something should be done with accelerators then this should be done related to the recuperation capacity.

Its easy to go into a board and write "idont like it, its crapp, its not work, its false calculated" ... but the boss-like post contains suggestions, calculations and finally a discussion / argument basement. Sry but your first posts dosn't had this.

I shall try to keep balanced

regards
Dschibait

Display More

Comments in bold italic under your contribution

Dschibait,

thank you very much for your reply.
Are you giving no choice but to test the amount of loss troops for capitulation?
Then I have to do it.

P.S.: You all give the wrong numbers of troops. Reality is different.

Quote from Kral_Medvidek_K

Dschibait,

thank you very much for your reply.
Are you giving no choice but to test the amount of loss troops for capitulation?
Then I have to do it.

P.S.: You all give the wrong numbers of troops. Reality is different.

the numbers are based on the production time and the percentages given ingame... no idea if those have been changed in reality but not in the info

Quote from Dschibait

@Kral_Medvidek_K
this calculation isn't explained such easy ... each unit has a different score (value) which is multiplied by the amount in your account. This sum is the (we called it) troop score. This is a part of your military score.
You have to lose a percentage of this score to get the possibility for capitulation.
Basicly this score dosn't say anything, because you can't say if its 1000 rams or 1002 templers or so ... (just an example - this isn't the right compare values)...
So if you build a bunch of spies your military ranking as well as this troop ranking will not grow like you will build the same amount of rams. Also, if you build troops after you lost them, you could maybe come out of this capitulation range.

@dYvorra
im not sure what your feedback from your post should target here ... but on end ok, you have your opinion and i have mine ... we will see our logs what happend here exactly in the next days - and if we need to adjust anything you can clap into your hands and enjoy yourself ...
But talking with a self called veteran about numbers who you didn't get in the last years isn't the right way for me.

Display More

When talking about opinions and sticking to them a solution will never be found.
A focus on military ranking points as such is ineffective. And i am sorry to read your last comment as if i was talking for myself.. which is not the case... you ask for a contribution which i give as general thinking starting from the idea behind the game... The numbers are correct and based on a database shared some time ago with Blackman (maybe you remember him)

So as a (as i understand fruitless given your remark (do you really need to make this kind of remarks in order to justify yourself ???)) last attempt: the basis for thinking in terms of acceleration for capitulators should be: 25 full production castles, this as 100% base... starting from there players above this level should get less capitulation bonuss and players below this more...

If you don t know me then your remark is based on ignorance if you do know me then it is contempt (especially knowing then where i come from the last few years)... i play this game for 10 years now...

Quote from dYvorra

When talking about opinions and sticking to them a solution will never be found.A focus on military ranking points as such is ineffective. And i am sorry to read your last comment as if i was talking for myself.. which is not the case... you ask for a contribution which i give as general thinking starting from the idea behind the game... The numbers are correct and based on a database shared some time ago with Blackman (maybe you remember him)

So as a (as i understand fruitless given your remark (do you really need to make this kind of remarks in order to justify yourself ???)) last attempt: the basis for thinking in terms of acceleration for capitulators should be: 25 full production castles, this as 100% base... starting from there players above this level should get less capitulation bonuss and players below this more...

If you don t know me then your remark is based on ignorance if you do know me then it is contempt (especially knowing then where i come from the last few years)... i play this game for 10 years now...

The digressive troops speed could be a solution to this.
This could both used for players that are really small until they reach a certain strength and for players that are capitulated until they reach a certain percentage of their previous max troops strength.