Discussion: Update to version 8.22

[DeletedUser]

I'm well on my way to winning my second world and I know people about to win their third and we are no where near the top 1%. Skill and id tagging won't win you a world. It sounds to me like you want id tagging back because it made things easier for 'you' and not the general player.

Well, the first part (you not being top 1%) I just don't believe. Winning 2 worlds? That's like being #1 out of 50k. That's the top .02%. Is that what you were saying? ;p
ID tagging won't win you a world. Skill will, though. Maybe you're just not seeing which skills you excel at.

It made things easier, yes. It made things easier for everyone I played with, also. Except that 80% of the people I played with didn't care enough about the game to use it.

PLEASE!!! MAKE IT AVAILABLE to the "general" player. Make it the first quest you do! Make it so that it's not just me using them.


I can only speak on my experiences, and the experiences I hear about. I've yet to hear someone say "Oh, I'm just so fed up with that dude tagging well." But I've seen a lot of people upset about this update.

 

[DeletedUser]

"Arbitrarily held back"? By a tool available to everyone? That gives an advantage to solo players? Which is the majority of "less-skilled" players?

We've been over this before. It's technically available to everyone. That does not mean everyone knows what it is. In a normal situation this would be acceptable. In a situation like being able to accurately tag 99% of attacks regardless of online times - it's not. Either everyone should have their incomings tagged like that, or nobody should.

Really? So ID-taggers are unfair advantages.

Correct.

Fake train scripts and opera shortcuts are effort.

Quote me where I said that.

And hitting the 20% of sleeping time by chance is, similarly, effort.

Quote me where I said that too.

You don't think people that put the effort into finding, maintaining, etc. deserve an advantage, though. Just the people that look for fake scripts and opera shortcuts.

That's not what I said at all. I was commenting on the effort of actually sending 1k trains. Which I thought was pretty clear if, you know, you actually read my comment.

... -->Scripts and Independant Tools --> Incoming Scripts --> TakTimer "Estimates launch times of attacks"
"Hmmm, I wonder how it does that?" -->clicky linky --> Attack ID guide

Like I said before (which you conveniently ignored) you have to know it exists to look for it, and most newbies don't. Trust me, I've worked with newbies before, I can count on one hand the number that even knew what a script was, much less had looked in the scripts forum.

Obfuscation doesn't level the playing field. It makes offense easier, and defense harder.

And that's probably why the mass-tagger was introduced at roughly the same time. I do not think that was a coincidence.

To summarize, I'd love to have a productive conversation with you about this, but that's kind of difficult when you pretend to ignore the things I am saying, and instead make up more convenient opinions that you can then reject.

Let me know if you want to actually respond to what I'm saying, instead of an imaginary opinion.

 

[fidel I]

Why can't inno let the public (TW players) vote on what they want the new changes to be like?

 

[DeletedUser]

A quote would be meaningless without the context of it being a reply to what I've said. Sending that many trains with a script and shortcuts isn't the impressive feat you make it out to be. And 1k is an exaggeration of the number that would need to be sent for many players to run out of defense.

I can send that many trains by taking 10 seconds to open rally points, then setting a heavy marble on a key or two.


If you read my response to Bo-john-bo, I gave an easy fix for it not being available. Also, there are several scripts that come standard in the TW quick bar. Why not make this one of them?

Unavailability, by your definition, can be applied to many, many aspects of this game. Such as the militia. How in the world would a newb ever find out about the militia?

Maybe instead of working so hard to remove tools, inno could help newbs out by finding ways to show them those tools. I bet it wouldn't take as long as creating caves and monsters.


BTW, you hadn't really said "all scripts are too hard for newbs to find" until now.

But really, if you don't take the time to look up some guides, you're not going to do well in the game regardless. (Or, conversely, have someone show you these things). It gets repeated often: TW is an information game as much as a strategy game.

If you look at the tribes I am in, and have been in (recently and in the past), you would see that I also interact with newbs regularly. I've started several tribes with the intention of being teaching tribes (those always seem to get eaten).

 

[DeletedUser]

If you read my response to Bo-john-bo, I gave an easy fix for it not being available. Also, there are several scripts that come standard in the TW quick bar. Why not make this one of them?

Because the ID systems as they existed were half-broken, mediocre-at-best scripts. My preferred solution would be, instead of bothering to make a script that actually fit in with TW's design, implement an auto-tagging feature as suggested by Muldie here. I did say at many points in this thread that there was a legitimate discussion to be had about incorporating offline tagging into the game. And honestly, that's the discussion we should be having - because I agree it should be in there, at very least as a setting. But Attack IDs were not the way forward for offline tagging.

 

[DeletedUser]

Well, the thing I like about attack IDs over auto-tagging is that using IDs was very skill based (or could be). But I could deal with auto tagging. The overriding point I'd like to make is that more available information while defending makes the game more strategic. It makes attacking, and active defense (what you do after the attacks are sent, rather than how you set your defense to prepare) more focused on strategy than grunt work.

If TakTimer and the ID tagger I used were combined (the automatic database from tak and the tagging features of my ID script) that would be a very good script. I feel like if people were able to make both of these for close to nothing, inno should be able to make a very good script easily.

I feel like the only part of IDs that was bad was the off site databasing perfect tagging stuff that I heard about (twfarmreport was broken basically immediately after I started using ID tagging).

Or perhaps the in game tagger could be improved. I can't use it, honestly. I never know anything about my tags. It doesn't have any of the features I look for in taggers (customizable naming and accuracy information).

 

[DeletedUser105718]

 

[DeletedUser92753]

id-tagging, bringing everyone together as a team! Screw those players who never tagged their id's! (which was almost always, me)

They Changed it, now it sucks

What these debates always remind me of.

 

[DeletedUser]

To some extent, exactly. They changed it, now it sucks. It took several months getting my account to a certain point using certain tools that are now taken away from me. The change shouldn't have been made mid-world.

 

[DeletedUser105406]

It took several months getting my account to a certain point using certain tools that are now taken away from me. The change shouldn't have been made mid-world.

I totally agree with this. The IG attack tagger is worse than nothing because it generates flawed data & unlike with new worlds, where players can decide whether they want to sign up & play under whichever current conditions Immo Games dictates, mid-late game-play represents a lot of accumulated hours & a significant financial commitment. I would not have invested £10 p/m for 11 months if I had been aware that the playing conditions which would directly affect my ability to play effectively were going to be radically altered from those which I originally signed up to, in the same way that I do not sign up to new worlds which have certain conditions attached. On the plus side, for players looking at motivation to get out of TW; I would say we are being given ample.

 

[DeletedUser]

How are they obfuscated? Can someone figure out a way to decipher the IDs and keep using them?

 

[DeletedUser]

How are they obfuscated? Can someone figure out a way to decipher the IDs and keep using them?

I worked with a few others to see if there was a pattern or a way to decipher them. We found nothing. As I recall, even the number of digits varied.

 

[DeletedUser]

Because the ID systems as they existed were half-broken, mediocre-at-best scripts.

It's been a while since I've been mass faked. But now I remember how good my ID tagger was. I really need to get with the designer, because it's the best tag tool I've seen. Gave a table of perfect support request information. Functional and aesthetically pleasing.

 

[DeletedUser105406]

i just deleted a new world i started on .us a few weeks ago. Being an odd-numbered world, I was surprised to discover the uber-P2W-enhanced-features enabled at all. I thought only even-numbered worlds had these (doh!)

The disparity in growth between those players who used & those players who didn't use P2W was really immense. Also, in the market, virtually nothing was being traded res-for-res, it was all res-for-PP tho through trading at a small loss each time, I did get a quite quick uptake on my res-for-res offers.

Presumably, players who are supportive of P2W will continue to participate but I bet many established players won't. It's argued that good playing skill can compensate for the uneven situation where rapid IG advance can be bought but will players choose to knock themselves out on hyper activity to try to do so?

I forfeited 2 weeks PP when I eventually deleted & it was hard to admit that I didn't actually feel I could compete...or mebbe I just couldn't be bothered to try anymore in a game with wholly artificially-skewed outcomes.

The continued diminishing & removal of IG tools & the introduction of flawed systems like IG-Tagger do nothing to make TW an attractive proposition anymore. Some of the claims I have read in support of this latest change to playing conditions, cite the former data-based ID-er as constituting some type of barely accessible esoteric information that few players knew about? I'd think that any player who is IG for any length of time would discover it from other players. I also think that if any player ever posted a question about it on Externals, they would have likewise received any information that they sought.

I know it will be up to individual players whether they continue to support playing TW; this post is just a reflection of the despondency I myself feel at how the game has had it's structure so radically altered to such a degree & that's why i've deleted what I could. 11 months in on my main world, I rely committed to it's completion but under the new playing conditions, it's really not something I'm anticipating getting as much enjoyment from & that represents a radical change.

 

[DeletedUser]

i just deleted a new world i started on .us a few weeks ago. Being an odd-numbered world, I was surprised to discover the uber-P2W-enhanced-features enabled at all. I thought only even-numbered worlds had these (doh!)

All .us worlds are p2p. It's only on .net where every odd world is not.

 

[DeletedUser]

To continue the derailment, I'm sure there is no real pattern in which worlds are or aren't p2w, or any other feature. Just what inno feels to be requested, popular, infrequently used, etc. settings that will make the next world popular.

 

[DeletedUser105718]

To continue the derailment, I'm sure there is no real pattern in which worlds are or aren't p2w, or any other feature. Just what inno feels to be requested, popular, infrequently used, etc. settings that will make the next world popular.

So far there was, so not sure what you're talking about?

 

[DeletedUser105406]

To continue the derailment

Sorry, thread derailment was not intentional & I never been on .us before so I didn't know about it being P2W all the way. Poor .us-ers! The point i was trying to make was that the introduction of the changes which have been implemented most recently in TW, most notably the continued expansion of P2W features, combined with the removal of the attack verification system ID-er have changed the game hugely from what it was & from what players like myself knowingly signed up to when we joined & made a commitment to playing a world long-term. All that is lacking now is reduced troops recruitment offered on P2W & reduced Noble Education times. Groovy command icons, we could & did play without & the rally points on the map don't seem to add much except inconvenience, when we have to work around them to avoid them. It's all very well making the game more fon-App friendly but I thought there was the TW2 experiment to put all this stuff on? At least players would know that they were signing up to a certain playing format whereas on older & established worlds, we began playing under set conditions which have since been changed & not, many of us argue, for the better. I think there should be an option for players to override & disengage from these persistent update changes & when I was adding up the cash spent over the last 11 months on basic PP, AM & FA, I just thought "sabotage" cos that's precisely how it feels & it's kind of distress-depressing.

 

[DeletedUser]

Your post seemed on point. Some things (like the rally pointish pop-up on the map) could be "opted out of". But IDs couldn't be opted out of or in to.

 

[DeletedUser105406]

Your post seemed on point. Some things (like the rally pointish pop-up on the map) could be "opted out of". But IDs couldn't be opted out of or in to.

no, they couldn't but i tell you vSv, i just feel so down after all this enforced change; nothing good that's been implemented outweighs the bad from the other changes, imo so guess i have nothing more to add :icon_neutral: