Stronghold: Introduction!

[Master Contrail Program]

Why are they even considered troop "tactics" in the first place? Mercs and donated troops are just extra troops. What's so special about these?

 

[Mebbwebb]

These are the ones you earn during events, anchorage and the ones you can get from buying or randomly earning.

 

[Quovatis]

Still wondering where the "player demand" is for troop tactics on defense. The vast majority of the posts here so far are against it, and there are countless pages about the same issue in the other thread. The only ones demanding it are likely the game designers who want more money, but at the expense of a crappy player experience.

The point of the stronghold (which we DID request) was to limit the number of offensive cards. At no point was there a vast call for defensive cards. We want to keep a level playing field where skill trumps money, but that's getting more and more distant. We understand you gotta make money, but please listen to our concerns and reverse the current course of more and more pay to win features. Paying should only let you advance faster, not obtain things others can not through normal gameplay.

The only way I can see it balancing if you want defensive troop cards is to give everybody a permanent builder's workshop, so we ALL can get the required 3 troop cards per day to donate. I'm against this idea, but if defensive troop cards must exist, then that's the way to balance it.

 

[S_How]

In addition to the concerns already provided here, it sounds like the stronghold is going to allow for multiple troop tactics. I would like to hear how you plan on balancing a game for an additional 80 capacity (what 2 troop cards is lol) or more without making it ptw lol. To me it seems totally impossible, to balance a game where you can purchase a 50% larger army or this kind of defense haha.

Anyhow, for what its worth, I felt that going into this if the limit was 1-2 offense tactics, and 1 defense tactic, it might be a net good addition to the game despite my misgivings about the defense portion of it. If its any more than that...it may actually make the game worse.

Trying so hard to keep a positive attitude.....any other work in the update to eliminate sandbagging to save middleweight alliances and help the heavyweight alliances have a fair shot at earning more glory for going in full weight?

 

[Master Contrail Program]

Ok. They're still just extra troops. Why are they considered tactics, and then push your real tactics further and further to the right of the screen.

 

[Master Contrail Program]

I'll try to remain positive too. Thought food for walls was going to make raiding much more of a chore, but after the first few weeks things seem to have balanced again.

This seems like a roundabout way of forcing people to use the oft-ridiculed, much neglected dock, and of course generate more revenue.

Then again, most of the community could choose to ignore this feature as well. Time will tell.

 

[Chadwicke]

This will make the game even more unfair we asked for no stalemate stopping sandbags and fair war and you give us cash troops that is fantastic so in new add we all must ask how much rack player makes a year to join so to have a chance every alliance will need someone who makes over 300k a year to support the alliance in war . This is suck great news , as suggested by the players my.......

 

[Ankara]

I know it will never happen, but I'd just plain prefer to see troop cards limited to multiplayer. Whenever I 5* a tough base in a war attack I'm happy about it...then think "they'll probably just figure I used a bunch of troop cards". Likewise, when my base gets levelled in a war attack, I wonder if they used troop cards or not. It's all just a bit detracting.

One other thing: I don't think we can say that they don't listen to players based on this particular community's comments. This forum probably equates to well below less than 1% of the player base. I have no idea what players request on other countries' forums or through support. I'd be happy not see another bought or event card again, but who knows...maybe more players purchase these things than don't, in which case the things should by all means be a part of the game. Rightly or wrongly, maybe new players feel the troop cards are the only way to roll with the big boys? It's got to take WAY longer to progress competitively from medieval age to Industrial Age and beyond than it did when I was medieval. More buildings get added, the university, additional library research...peer pressure.

Again, I don't know. I just sort of wonder if a player like myself is in fact a dinosaur...and not in the majority. If this were the case, then the game may be providing exactly what the majority of it's players want. If so, the question of whether all the additional content that may have created the perception of troop cards being a necessity is more salient than the issue of the damage/benefit of the troop cards themselves to the game.

When the the university was first introduced I thought the purpose was to slow the game down...a way to add content without constantly adding additional ages, and thereby keep a lid on the memory demands on devices playing the game and so extend the playability of the game in its incarnation at that time. Then atomic came out so I was wrong and I'm still trying to figure out the design intent of the university.

 

[GailWho]

Ok so now... not only are sandbaggers gonna have Iron Age bases but they will also have strongholds in them with possible Atomic Age troops coming out of them... wonderful.

 

[ColdestRage]

I am not negative about Stronghold.
In the long run everyone will need to use one sabotage more and it'll end Stalemates as less skilled players will struggle with one tactic less.

What I'm negative about is this statement:

"Due to player demand, we’ve also enabled the option to donate Troop Tactics to allies during the planning day in a World War"

Which player demand?
Tbh I read daily FB of Dominations, and am here each day.

I HAVEN'T seen even ONE demand like the one stated.

Nb4powerup It's sad that you of all Nexon/BHG staff are begining to lie to us

 

[Veldan]

ColdestRage

Calm yourself, noone is lying. I have seen players suggest on these forums that BHG give them a way to use troop cards defensively several times.

And on top of that, the whole English / Western part of the internet is only part of their playerbase. You probably have no clue what their Asian players are suggesting and demanding. Or the Russians.

 

[Blacknife686]

Extra building for defense is great, but as multiple people have already mentioned, that gives way to the possibility of HUNDREDS of addition troops staining from this one building. A normal garrison deploys 5-6 foot troops per wave, and stables have from 2-3. Providing a building that has the potential to spawn 3x 35 troop armies at once is ludicrous. On another side you could have a Gunpowder base or lower base spawning 2 Heavy Tanks and 2 Flammpanzers at once with NO way to counter it.

This feature "may" change the offensive playing field but also has the potential to completly destroy defense, and no war replays is a convenient way to hide this feature...

Perhaps that's a reason we don't have war replays; because that way Nexon and BHG can simply say the unbalance in the game is nothing to do with their features.

 

[llcooldon]

Lots of hate for something that hasn't been released yet!

They just had an introduction to a new building and plenty of people are jumping up and down complaining without even seeing it. This is just a part of the next update so why not try it out before saying it's no good.

 

[Angel forever]

Yes who wants to face an howitzers army coming out of a stronghold? Who's wants to face 2+ army cards coming out. You have a rich guy in your alliance that buys shot load of event cards then throws them in your strong golf for defensive in war it's going to make war competitive but very pay to win :-(reduce army cards get rid of stronghold building

 

[Angel forever]

I want to say nexon worst idea ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Epic fail

 

[Angel forever]

One other thing to put out. They want to make lots of money SO ID SAY GET OVER IT PAY TO WIN IS HERE :-/ sorry to say my friends. This game is fun getting ruined quickly.

 

[Quovatis]

Quite the contrary. Many are very favorable toward the stronghold itself. The concern is just the defense card aspect of the implementation. It's better to voice that concern now, as those who play war all the time can already see the writing on the wall.

 

[Horsepower]

Stronghold money trap?

Stronghold needs feeding.

Stronghold will live on troop cards.

Players need troop cards. They then need more troop cards. With Stronghold will come more troop cards. It will rain more troop cards. End result....Nexon cleans up $$$

 

[Chadwicke]

Currently the special is 10 Atomic age machine gun armys before it was 4 Field howitzer armies so someone could pass that out to all the alliance that would be 76 extra defending troops and this is if the limit is two armies , it's probably line 5 so that would be almost 200 troops on defense before the regular base whick if they are spending cash like that is maxed also ...Fun =over

 

[Angel forever]

No hate. Agree to limit event cards Troop tactics tactics whatever it falls into. Disagree with the defense side. I have event cards that have 35-40 units in one card. Who wants 4-6 event cards that spawn 35 archers that dmg of 202 against units range of 5 with 375 hp. Now 5x35 175 extra units possible on defense love ya but no thanks