Who is coming?

DeletedUser4951

Guest
I'm just going to hazard a guess and say that Dr. Seuss teams had way more gold spenders than the rest of the server combined. This has been my experience at least in my brief trips to the US since 2017 that this team or other combinations of it way out spend the competition. But now that the US received an actual team to compete with them, its clearly not enough to just chuck gold at the problem or even spam. Sure. It'll save some cities. But it won't save everybody.

The game is built in a way where gold can even the playing field or overwhelm less talented teams. But groups that know what they're doing and are committed to seeing the world through can overcome heavy gold spending.
 

DeletedUser16359

Guest
I see you got your understanding of economics from the same spot Inno did. As Scot explained, the current model is not long-term sustainable, which is why the player base has shrunk to a small fraction of what it was at it's peak. Pay to win in a competitive game does not work long term. There has to be a balance between spending money to gain an advantage and keeping that advantage from being overwhelming. Right now the game is literally pay to win. You can just flat out purchase practically everything available in the game. This more than anything else is what keeps new players from staying, and drives away old players. Inno shot themselves in the foot making the game pay to win.

Honestly they don't care about the long term sustainability of a game, they just keep making new titles, attract a player base, make it blatant pay to win, milk it for everything it is worth, and meanwhile release a new title. As long as they keep releasing new games, it doesn't matter if the old games fail Inno stays profitable. Their business model is based on churning out new titles, and attracting more whales, not turning current properties into cash cows.
us grepolis forum econ lessons, I do hope this is a MasterClass of some kind. I agree that Inno should be trying to grow their base and long term revenue with it, but this isn't their only product and short term profit seeking usually wins out in business.

Been playing a long time with and without gold and the style of play has burned more players than gold abuse, coupled with the declining service. I watched bot spam and regular spam burn out a number of players last server and the one mod that was helping was struggling to keep up with it. Couple that with nobody teaching rookies how to play your player base shrinks pretty fast. I can't remember the last time I saw a training alliance with a contending alliance.

what's this fair play rule?

p.s. Al I think we are in agreement for a change lol
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fair play rule is In EN simply put spamming of any kind "catta spamming (covers cattaing a city to rubble as well) spamming every 5mins basically excessive attacking on a player deemed too much and or ruining said players game play experience..
If that comes here a number of players will be banned but it will help attract newer players and bring back older players .
Spartans189 always liked you but its ok too disagree lol
 

DeletedUser16359

Guest
lmao why would the us servers want something like that!? (Italic for sarcasm)

why not "Be the change you wish to see..."
I lack the endearing charm that cultivates, in spite of this I have tried in the past with spotty results. last server there wasn't an opportunity
 

DeletedUser15403

Guest
Fair play rule is In EN simply put spamming of any kind "catta spamming (covers cattaing a city to rubble as well) spamming every 5mins basically excessive attacking on a player deemed too much and or ruining said players game play experience..
If that comes here a number of players will be banned but it will help attract newer players and bring back older players .
Spartans189 always liked you but its ok too disagree lol
Sorry but this couldn't be more wrong lmao - im lazy so im not going to go screen shot what everyone else can do and go look up the actual rule you're referencing but I can tell you for one the wording on that rule references less than half of what you mentioned here..
Stone hailing is not part of the rule - nor should it be - Stone hail is not spam ... its a tactic to destroy a persons city
Spamming every 5 minutes can be used as a tactic vs's a gold spender so that they can't gold out units ( granted it has to be used in a situation that warrnts - maybe you're landing a CS on the person and you don't want them golding out units to snipe with ... or vice versa you destroyed one of their nukes and you don't want them goding out another one while you're handling a defensive op agains them... etc etc )

I think the wording even leaves it open ended for mods opinion on what is spam or not...

What WOULD be considered spam is a round the clock legit SPAM op - something along the lines of what Charlie from JFL would do - where he would literallytry and freeze your browsers with incomings attacks / spies/ and support...flood your incoming list so heavily that it creates lag for you and can even freeze you're internet in some cases... the abuse of that tactic is what drove community managers over in EN to create the fair play ( spam ) rule -- butI assure you it does not include Stone hail nor a 5 min spam op to prevent a gold spender from popping out units... and even more so its open ended for a game mod to decide themselves if its against fair play
 

DeletedUser7205

Guest
Wow this topic got a lot of attention. As someone that owns a business, I am well aware of the need to make a profit. To put everything in very basic terms, if my company was Grepolis / Inno, would I rather have a player base of 10,000 players that spend $20 / mo or $200,000 / mo revenue or would I prefer a player base of 800 players that spend an avg of $100 / mo or $80,000. Clearly you want the bigger base that spends smaller but more consistently.

There are several other things that could help this game be more attractive to pure strategists. BTW, I liken Grepolis more to a giant game of RISK with about 500 players in a world. It's not simply a war game. It's a team game that requires, knowledge of the mechanics, leadership, strategy and coordination.

As you mentioned, not everyone can stay at their computer all day (or their phone though the app is hideous) so why not give us another 50 gold for 14 days for a 6th advisor called something like "The General". Perhaps this advisor could give you 20 slots a day to stage various tasks (attacks, 3 hour farming, support, recall, spy, direct messaging, etc...) that would allow you to build out your day with activities and therefore still work but yet your grep schedule could be automated. Again just 20 things a day and those would go fast. Attacks would of course still be bound to anti-timer.

The core of this game is still strong but the lack of catering to the audience is disturbing.
 

DeletedUser16359

Guest
larger group of players spending less per person means higher operating cost without the revenue to match

I might be misreading "the general" but it looks an awful lot like a premium bot, would be against this myself because it's against the core of this game and the rules since my first server at least. Admin and a functioning app are plenty
 

NetizenSteve

Artisan
The core of this game is still strong but the lack of catering to the audience is disturbing.
I am with you %100 on the point that the game would be so much better if we didn't have to be glued to our laptops or phone 24/7 to play with any hope of remaining competitive. I do wish something could be done to automate things as you said.

But as far as them "catering to an audience", I don't think you realize the sheer volume of players they actually have. This is just the US server. There's 22 other countries with their own servers playing this game. There are 30 worlds running on this server, or is it 29? I just checked the in-game ranking, and under the Greposcore tab, there are over 3000 player accounts...just in Mesembria. Not all of them have scores, but they are there. I'm not even going to try to do the math to figure out exactly how many players there actually are, but I know they've been up and running with a strong player base since 2009.

I'm saying this just to say that the system they have in place works for them, and has been working for a long time. So the likelihood of them making any changes due to anything we discuss or complain about in these forums isn't very promising.
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser7205

Guest
@Spartans189 - Actually that is not the case. I manage servers for a living and write software / applications as well. The operating costs of spinning up an Apache, PHP, Linux virtual server is basically nothing. The overhead from 800 active players and 10,000 active players is almost nothing. Basically the virtual servers run on a host and the only extra expense would be minor bandwidth, minor processor cycles and a tiny bit of memory. Trust me I have managed over 11,000 servers with a team of 4 freaking people for one of the largest companies in the world. Also, in today's era, hardware for hosts to give is extremely cheap. One physical host running VMware can easily host hundreds of virtual servers especially if used with high availability and fail over. The only cost of overhead would be the "moderator" costs due to increased activity.

@NetizenSteve - Yes I agree that the developers (Inno) have no real interest in changing based on nagging fuddy duddy's like me and others. I would only ask Inno to sell off the Grep game to a developer who would like to make it more viable which means it needs more than a fraction of their attention.
 

DeletedUser262

Guest
larger group of players spending less per person means higher operating cost without the revenue to match
Dunning-Kruger effect right here. I haven't worked in IT since my highschool job, and I have a rough idea how little it would take to run this game.

I would only ask Inno to sell off the Grep game to a developer who would like to make it more viable which means it needs more than a fraction of their attention.
The original tribal war engine is licensed out. Which is why there are a lot of TW clones.

3000 player accounts...just in Mesembria.
With less than 500 which are active players. This world has been running for weeks, and has comparatively nothing for a player base when looking at peak Grepo. It is not like there are a bunch of other better options right now on the US servers either.

Like Scot I am also a business owner, and the current business model being used for Grepo is trash for the very reasons he highlighted. It only works because they have other properties constantly coming out.

The biggest disconnect I see is why people think other players quit. The largest reason is 100% because they don't feel they can compete in a pay to win game. The reason those "training" alliances don't exist anymore is because they get obliterated by golders. I played in a lot of training alliances and small alliances without golders, and almost every time someone quit it was for the same reason, they could not compete with someone who rebuilt a full nuke overnight. Hell, that is why I don't play seriously any more, and don't spend money on this game. I refuse to buy into the pay to win model, or even support it with my money. I have no problem supporting a game worth playing, this isn't it.
 

DeletedUser16359

Guest
the early stages of servers and events seem to have the most spending. Shorter, more frequent worlds would be more profitable to them in the near future. Though I don't agree with Inno's consistent push for quick profits, simple ol' me finds it difficult to imagine an expanding player base without additional staff/resources.

Lol love the Dunning-Kruger, had one for breakfast. While I don't doubt your HS tech skillz, it seems unlikely you're qualified to throw that around in addition to being an expert in everything else. If I'm mistaken though, I apologize, rarely run into achieving polymaths so eager to prove their worth on the grepolis forums. Link me your podcast, edgermacating me on economics, programming, psychology, interweb dominance, CEO-ISM, squash, etc...

The biggest disconnect I see is why people think other players quit. The largest reason is 100% because they don't feel they can compete in a pay to win game. The reason those "training" alliances don't exist anymore is because they get obliterated by golders. I played in a lot of training alliances and small alliances without golders, and almost every time someone quit it was for the same reason, they could not compete with someone who rebuilt a full nuke overnight. Hell, that is why I don't play seriously any more, and don't spend money on this game. I refuse to buy into the pay to win model, or even support it with my money. I have no problem supporting a game worth playing, this isn't it.
It still isn't a pay to win game, people can and have competed without golding or even advisors, but the best alliances don't want to be bothered with growing the skill base. It's definitely easier just to play with familiar people who know how to operate from week 1, good players need to go out of their way to teach novices if they want to help the game to grow again. People that quit tend to fall back on a couple familiar excuses because it glosses over their own mistakes but I'm mostly 100% likely sure that social desirability bias doesn't need to be explained to you.

4realz though it would be nice if Inno did a little more to attract new players. Has anyone seen any ads for grepolis recently?

edit:
@Spartans189 - Actually that is not the case. I manage servers for a living and write software / applications as well. The operating costs of spinning up an Apache, PHP, Linux virtual server is basically nothing. The overhead from 800 active players and 10,000 active players is almost nothing. Basically the virtual servers run on a host and the only extra expense would be minor bandwidth, minor processor cycles and a tiny bit of memory. Trust me I have managed over 11,000 servers with a team of 4 freaking people for one of the largest companies in the world. Also, in today's era, hardware for hosts to give is extremely cheap. One physical host running VMware can easily host hundreds of virtual servers especially if used with high availability and fail over. The only cost of overhead would be the "moderator" costs due to increased activity.
I assumed this would be the biggest issue, mods were swamped from just one irritant last world. They seem to be looking for mods all the time but idk how or if they are compensated.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser7205

Guest
Haven't seen an ad since 2013 / 2014 when my jerk of a friend saw it, started it then invited me (ugggh). Way back then....
- no stone hail
- no heroes
- no 30% BP for clearing deadstick allies or alliance mates (*)
- no Discord (though people used Skype)
- farms required resources not BP to capture and too many demands would send them into revolt (*)
- gold use only cut the time of builds by 50% rather than instant complete (*)
- there was no gold trading. if you wanted gold, you paid for it. (*)

Yet it was still very, very fun. Strategy prevailed. Good leadership prevailed.

I believe all the changes with (*) to have had a negative affect on the game but that's just me.
 

DeletedUser16477

Guest
Haven't seen an ad since 2013 / 2014 when my jerk of a friend saw it, started it then invited me (ugggh). Way back then....
- no stone hail
- no heroes
- no 30% BP for clearing deadstick allies or alliance mates (*)
- no Discord (though people used Skype)
- farms required resources not BP to capture and too many demands would send them into revolt (*)
- gold use only cut the time of builds by 50% rather than instant complete (*)
- there was no gold trading. if you wanted gold, you paid for it. (*)

Yet it was still very, very fun. Strategy prevailed. Good leadership prevailed.

I believe all the changes with (*) to have had a negative affect on the game but that's just me.
....not to mention the game was not as heavily policed back in the day....running multiple accounts was more or less the norm :cool:
 

jdubbs

Citizen
Yup. Golding is killing grepo. 10 years ago it was an accomplishment to have 80 cities by the end of WW. And the world would likely last close to a year. Now way different. Gold is taking the place of skill. As far as revolt. My least favorite. It seems all I do is rebuild walls. That's where 70% of my resources go.. Lol
As much as instant complete can help, the old half time for 50 gold was way way better. Made it more fair for people who didn't use gold. I personally wouldn't do away with instant, but I would bring back the half time for 50 gold as an option. That way instant complete isn't such an absurd advantage. Gold users will still be impatient.
 

DeletedUser262

Guest
simple ol' me finds it difficult to imagine an expanding player base without additional staff/resources.
I don't know if you are serious or are being deliberately obtuse. It isn't that it wouldn't take more resources, it is that the resources needed would scale slower than the income generated.

It still isn't a pay to win game, people can and have competed without golding or even advisors
It literally a pay to win game. Look up the definition of "pay to win". People can't "compete" without gold unless they are teamed with someone else that is golding. I know, because I have tried. When I actually played seriously I considered anything less than a 2 to 1 BP gain a bad exchange, and was a top 10 fighter, it didn't matter though because no matter how well I played the game I could not beat someone that could just gold in a full nuke or full defense or spam 3 times as many tokens as me. That is why now I don't even try. I am here to farm gold, and as a matter of fact I got 3k in the last couple days, which makes me feel like I won. Pretty sure I sold the stone to one player to repair the wall I damaged. I am not here to try and compete, because it is pointless without spending actual cash, and I will not support a pay to win game.

As much as instant complete can help, the old half time for 50 gold was way way better. Made it more fair for people who didn't use gold
Um, no. How do you justify the argument that a 50% reduction was more fair to free to play players than a instant complete? Because it now costs more? How does that make a difference to the literal millionaires that play this game? It just moves the pay to win threshold while making it even more pay to win.
 

DeletedUser7205

Guest
@everyone - I am more than willing to find a game less tilted to spending heaps of money to win and more towards strategy, teamwork, leadership, etc... Every game must have some pay to play aspect in order to win. I'm looking for a strategic game with a beginning and an end at set times similar to Grep. At this point, I don't see the need to even play Grep anymore as it is far too tilted towards paying. Also, its not because I don't have gold. I have plenty and will simply leave it on the shelf.

1598626367757.png
 

DeletedUser262

Guest
Starborne is a space based game that is another TW clone, and they cap the amount of purchasable boosts on a daily/weekly/montly/server basis. The problem for me is it still is too pay to win for my tastes, and from what I understand their is a pretty brutal soft cap on expansions so simply staying active means you will be within 1-2 "cities" of the top player, regardless of how badly you play. I don't really care for that kind of cap that restricts skill from being as important as just being active. I might still give it a try, but I won't play it more than casually. It may be the kind of game you are looking for though.
 

DeletedUser15255

Guest
@everyone - I am more than willing to find a game less tilted to spending heaps of money to win and more towards strategy, teamwork, leadership, etc... Every game must have some pay to play aspect in order to win. I'm looking for a strategic game with a beginning and an end at set times similar to Grep. At this point, I don't see the need to even play Grep anymore as it is far too tilted towards paying. Also, its not because I don't have gold. I have plenty and will simply leave it on the shelf.

View attachment 3299
dont be like that u know grepo is the home for people like us
 

DeletedUser16359

Guest
I don't know if you are serious or are being deliberately obtuse. It isn't that it wouldn't take more resources, it is that the resources needed would scale slower than the income generated.
I'm acutely serious lol. How do you know it's scalable? what percentage of players are spending 400 gold per month? If an entire alliance can't compete against a single "Gold Whale" how many would it take to make up for that player? I like my insults with detail

It literally a pay to win game. Look up the definition of "pay to win". People can't "compete" without gold unless they are teamed with someone else that is golding. I know, because I have tried. When I actually played seriously I considered anything less than a 2 to 1 BP gain a bad exchange, and was a top 10 fighter, it didn't matter though because no matter how well I played the game I could not beat someone that could just gold in a full nuke or full defense or spam 3 times as many tokens as me. That is why now I don't even try. I am here to farm gold, and as a matter of fact I got 3k in the last couple days, which makes me feel like I won. Pretty sure I sold the stone to one player to repair the wall I damaged. I am not here to try and compete, because it is pointless without spending actual cash, and I will not support a pay to win game.
I managed to figure it out playing mostly solo in the age of insta, so again it's difficult but not impossible. Golding isn't the reason for the decline in players, lazy tactics and lack of novice training is shrinking the pool.
 
Last edited by a moderator: