Current Rating 118. I will have been playing this game for 2 years come December.
Going to keep this simple and short...
Did I read that right? Eventually classic Maps are gone for good at some point? Terrible news... any semblance of strategy is out the window with 1.5 Maps.
In short, I will have to end playing this game should adjustments not be made... and I am sure that I am not the only one who feels this way.
The above statement simply expresses the fact that 1.5 is a shell of a game that "classic" held.
Classic 25, 22, 10 (12) provided a sense of challenge no matter the country of choice. Alliances were meaningful, and actions or inaction had consequences.
Although classic is imperfect, abandoning it completely certainly is a thumb in the face of seasoned players, player choice, and game design.
1.5 Offers very little in terms of positive game changes. I have played or currently playing about a dozen maps.
Positives:
Personally, the only upgrade I appreciated was the spreading out of resources across each nation's map.
Negatives:
100% about rushing to victory.
= no point in playing smaller countries
= no real strategy employed
= short term decisions vs long term strat
Economy plays no to little impact given games are usually determined within hrs to 2 days.
Most territory upgrades/ military/ econ are predicated on being able to log in 30 min to a few hrs. Again supporting short term and speed game play.
I can only assume 1.5 is the result of data mining in terms of what will drive more players to purchase gold ... pay to win. I do not mind gold users, it's their money. However, driving the entire player base towards the use of gold to win... seems cheap. An option sure, again I want the business to be supported. I understand you need to diversify income beyond ads.
Going to keep this simple and short...
Did I read that right? Eventually classic Maps are gone for good at some point? Terrible news... any semblance of strategy is out the window with 1.5 Maps.
In short, I will have to end playing this game should adjustments not be made... and I am sure that I am not the only one who feels this way.
The above statement simply expresses the fact that 1.5 is a shell of a game that "classic" held.
Classic 25, 22, 10 (12) provided a sense of challenge no matter the country of choice. Alliances were meaningful, and actions or inaction had consequences.
Although classic is imperfect, abandoning it completely certainly is a thumb in the face of seasoned players, player choice, and game design.
1.5 Offers very little in terms of positive game changes. I have played or currently playing about a dozen maps.
Positives:
Personally, the only upgrade I appreciated was the spreading out of resources across each nation's map.
Negatives:
100% about rushing to victory.
= no point in playing smaller countries
= no real strategy employed
= short term decisions vs long term strat
Economy plays no to little impact given games are usually determined within hrs to 2 days.
Most territory upgrades/ military/ econ are predicated on being able to log in 30 min to a few hrs. Again supporting short term and speed game play.
I can only assume 1.5 is the result of data mining in terms of what will drive more players to purchase gold ... pay to win. I do not mind gold users, it's their money. However, driving the entire player base towards the use of gold to win... seems cheap. An option sure, again I want the business to be supported. I understand you need to diversify income beyond ads.