whoooooo hooooooo, just spent another $160 on crowns
Actually the model most all MMO's use these days is a free to play with lots of opportunity to spend at your own pace
As well, with these MMO's you can ONLY experience the full game and all it has to offer when you give up the $$$. So if your complaining that the players who support the game are ruining it (by which all MMO's succeed). Then either play like a free to play player or spend the $$$$ to achieve the level you desire
After you try all the other MMO's , you keep coming back to SHK's
Wizard wrote:Myladyskye personally I don't buy cards never spent a crown on them, I did when I started on premium for building queues but never on cards. Since I stated I manage to pile up over 1300 cards and still have over 80 unopened card packs. I have tons of card but I'm not a carder, I still have some in case they become needed but it didn't stop me from growing really big without them and surviving all that time, getting vassal, filling vassals and even having quite descent stats.
So it is totally doable to play, grow big and survive without spending 1000$ on cards
I agree with much of what you've said, as most of my teammates at present aren't heavy carders and we are still surviving . . .
But are you willing to concede that if you aren't in a House full of heavy carders that your chances of getting a glory star for your house are practically nil?
When injustice is law, resistance becomes duty . . .
MiladySkye wrote:
But are you willing to concede that if you aren't in a House full of heavy carders that your chances of getting a glory star for your house are practically nil?
I agree with that statement.
But like I compared to other free to play MMO's. If you want to play the end game content (so to speak) you need to invest some $$$ to do so. Otherwise if your going to play free to play in its truest sence you really cannot expect a full experience
players who play any MMO out there with a free to play model and expect to achieve or experience the same as a paying customer have missed the mark. However remarkable in SHK's even a player who has never spent a dime can still destroy the heaviest carders castle with a few timed attacks.......everytime. Yet they cry its not balanced. Seems quite fair to me
After you try all the other MMO's , you keep coming back to SHK's
Pointing out that there are other games with even worse free-to-play game design philosophies is not the way to go.
I don't consider myself and expert in these matters by any means, but I would say that Stronghold is different to most MMOs, in that it is centred around PvP and the interactions between players.
I do find it a little sad that I am complaining about the people who technically keep the game afloat, but I find it even more sad that the game is at this level now where people feel as though they HAVE to pay in order to keep up or 'spend the $$$$ to achieve the level they desire' as you call it.. and that is a big red flag when it comes to game design with f2p games, one of which I am reluctant to endorse.
In my eyes, I would even broaden game design's red flag to be anything that gives a significant time or strength advantage for a paying player vs a non-paying player. Monetisation, when done right, is largely unobtrusive and not decrementing from gameplay - it takes a very careful approach to intrinsically design the game with monetisation in mind, but those tend to be the best F2P games - I would list Team Fortress 2 as an excellent example of a F2P game done right. I admit that most games have to make concessions in this regard, but still, there's an acceptable level of this, and then there's an unacceptable level..
Regarding MMO F2P games, I don't actually have that much experience of them. Too many MMO F2P games are just pay to play in a rather deceptive disguise, so I generally avoid them. However, I do know that in general that games in this genre usually involve two main paid items - 'boosters' (of some description) and 'items' either by rental or purchasing outright.
Stronghold cards are loosely meant to provide these two things, however with all the updates geared towards new cards providing even more options, the market has become over-saturated and over-featured..
Instead of an 'xp booster' like in other games that allows you to have a single, flat rate extra xp (per some unit time), you have a verly large selection of cards that can be used to boost your honour gain through a variety of different avenues, some of which can be instantly gained. Not only does this mean that players can gain an insane amount of honour if they invest heavily, it also means that those who only invest a little will only get a fraction of it. This then goes back to the red flag I mentioned earlier, as it instigates an almost limitless scale of spending<->honour gain. And that doesn't even go into the utility gain from cards that do instant building, instant coin, fast troops and scouts etc, nor the fact that many of these cards are only available through the most expensive sets of card packs, extending this scale even further for those with the most cash.
I would also add that most other games involving level have a matchmaking system to pair similar levels together so that each player gets a reasonable level of playing field. The honour system in Stronghold is meant to provide this, but as outlined above, it becomes somewhat meaningless to those with the crowns to spend.
Then there's the entirely separate argument of 'but faith points cannot be carded', which while explicitly true is implicitly not so accurate. Faith point gain is tied to the building of all the faith buildings (which is tied to coin and stockpile good acquisition, which is usually then down to your development in other areas) and quests (which is also tied to your level and development). Both sets of things can be linked and greatly increased by carders.. not only do they get the early game boost through the quests being done sooner, but they also get the early villages and castles to get maximum natural gain as soon as possible.
I realise that I am mostly speaking about the heavier carders as it seems that those are the ones that have the largest game presence as well as political power. Such potential should not be available in this game in my opinion.
So, here's to another rant of mine, possibly over, probably more I could say.. but there we go.
@Wizard/Milady:
I agree with what you have both said!
It is possible, no doubt, I have done it myself, but the acquisition is so slow that it has taken two years of constant playing to have a semi-'reasonable' pool of cards/points, but I know they would not last long if I really began using them..
You seem to have an even better natural pile than me, good on you for doing this! but the debate here isn't whether doing it is possible, there's no question that it's possible to play this game, grow or enjoy it without cards.. the issue here is the usage of cards and their effect on that process, and the game in its entirety as Milady has pointed towards in her question.
EDIT (because new post):
I don't expect the same playing field, but this game is designed in such a way that everyone has no choice but to TRY and play on the same field as those that can almost limitlessly buff themselves.
I would also refute the notion that a few timed attacks would finish off the biggest of carders. If that castle is fully carded up, it'll take more than just a handful, and if they were that desperate I can think of a fair number of players that would either card up armies, or take a charter and card up towns just to remain where they are.
EDIT #2:
Also, please don't get me wrong, I can see how I could appear pretty angry given the negativity I express in these, but that is not the case.. I just don't like seeing an interesting concept going to waste.
I think the card system *could* be used in such a way that it is fair, it didn't seem to be as much of an issue in the earlier days, but it's hard to pin that down to the people that have arrived since then or the changes to the game that have happened since.. and either way it all points down to the base design philosophy employed by Firefly, which is what I am trying to address or outline above.
1) 7 attacks (done properly) will penetrate any castle ,anytime no matter the cards in play. I have had my castles destroyed by tacticians timing superb attacks and the keep was always breached on the 7th army. I had every card and the best of which in play at those times to defend. I suppose you can argue my castle design was at fault or troop placement, but its just that, an argument
2) No talk given to perhaps the most powerful tool in this game and its free. 'Diplomacy' . For the largest part the SHK's community player base is mature and reasonable and most often open to dialogue when respect is given first in the discussion. This tool can when used properly provide avenues for playstyles which best suit the individual
After you try all the other MMO's , you keep coming back to SHK's
1) 7 attacks (done properly) will penetrate any castle ,anytime no matter the cards in play. I have had my castles destroyed by tacticians timing superb attacks and the keep was always breached on the 7th army. I had every card and the best of which in play at those times to defend. I suppose you can argue my castle design was at fault or troop placement, but its just that, an argument
2) No talk given to perhaps the most powerful tool in this game and its free. 'Diplomacy' . For the largest part the SHK's community player base is mature and reasonable and most often open to dialogue when respect is given first in the discussion. This tool can when used properly provide avenues for playstyles which best suit the individual
Thank you.
In regards to your newest points..
1) In most cases, 7 decently planned attacks will admittedly do the job.
The problem is that it takes no skill to card up castles, troops and villages in hours or even minutes, yet it takes a great amount of skill, luck and patience to even have a chance at razing a village of a heavy carder.
Not to mention that there's usually a charter next door or another castle within arms reach, so the potential for another fully built village is just moments away.
There is no card that can ensure complete safety for a village (only make attempts against it a lot more difficult) and there's definitely room to "defeat" a carder through making life so difficult for them that they leave.. But as mentioned before, it's not the potential I am arguing against, it's the degree of edge that those players are able to obtain through the money they spend that I am voicing against.
2) Diplomacy is only as powerful as the strength behind your words.
I have seen this from both from the standpoint of a neutral faction/house leader, and from being in the leadership of strong houses on a couple of worlds. Diplomacy works when you have great respect of the other party and/or obvious strength and threat - if you don't hold a perceived threat, the bigger houses will either ignore you or crush you.
The biggest issue in relation to this is the ease in which players can move from house to house. This has enabled the moving of glory stars through the moving of the biggest players from house to house.. then THAT has enabled the situation in world 9, where diplomacy, war and rumours of war have kept the majority of the map under a single point of control for the entire game here thus far.
Diplomacy certainly has its place, no arguments against that, but mercy or reasonable justice is somewhat rare, at least in my experience.
Wizard wrote:Grandy as information for you, I never cared about the stars we can get from being in number 1 house for the round, that is a part of the game that never mattered to me. They needed an objective an end game and they chose that but that doesn't force you to go for that. You could play for leaderboards if you wanted, I play to donate and build my parishes, I do not play to destroy others, only those who annoy me instead.
And as for heavy carder, they are always destructible in this game no matter how much money you spend you can still be killed. I totally understand them banding together to protect each other and their investment of money, but other players like me who don't spend money will let these players build their village and castle and the steal them from those players. That's why I will never spend money on card because the money I spent could end up helping my enemy.
I appreciate your lack of care for stars, I feel the same way, at least here in w9. It's always nice to be on the winning side of course, but if I want to win, I should have to work hard for it! As I have expressed before, I only continue playing and fighting here because of the great people I get to play alongside and the shared hatred of what H1 have done to this world, which has reflected on the game as a whole.
Your philosophy towards spending is a little peculiar, but I loosely understand the sentiment, given what you have said previously. What I don't understand is the logic behind it, since it suggests that you shouldn't do anything to build up any of your villages in-case an enemy should come along and take it? I mean, myself and others do this with newly taken villages fairly often, but that is because we are constantly moving and never really staying in one place..
For someone who has long term aims, lightly carding or not will just affect your individual progress - if an enemy sees a crappy castle/village they're most likely to just raze it, or if in a good position, capture it.. but then they can just use THEIR cards to bring it up to meet their needs, or just ferry goods to it - villages are just launching points, and the fact your village(s) exist somewhere means they could be a target unfortunately!
When I played as a neutral, it was actually really hard work. I led a small group of active neutrals, and I can say it took a very long time to build trust between ourselves and the houses around us, enough that they would trust that we were being completely neutral and independent, and trust us when we gave our word about something.
Though as I have said before, diplomacy only really works from the strong to the weak, and not the other way around.. in the majority of questionable situations it was the fist that reacted first; it is rare to find those who will act upon the injustices of the "weak"..
Priest Guardian wrote:Everything you said in that last post is true by all accounts. At least based on what I have seen
I can't help but add my little piece here. With most projects in life, there is the initial design and then the final design which looks nothing like the original. We all know that money is a major factor in almost every aspect of life. I have to say that even us players have influence over future updates. If the cards are too strong or it becomes too much of a pay to win. We can band together and refuse to fight or reject the glory rounds. This will sure change the course of future updates if the trend picks up.
I have seen this happen on older worlds before but the momentum wasn't there.
I calculated 1000 dollars and how that would buy you in game. Let's just do the most basic packs which is five cards at about $5. That would be 200 packs. Let's say that a carder spends 1000 a month. That would be about 5000 (25x200) card points minimum. It is more like 6000 card points from the $1000 dollars. then 64 cards a months. That is quite a massive advantage. I know I can do a lot with 500 card points. Imagine how much I can do with 5000?
There is also skill involved in card use. You only learn when you play enough cards. So the arguement that free players get cards also is not a fair statement because there is no way they will learn how to play the cards with only a fraction of the cards.
The combo I hate the most is the build at x5 speed. And then play the 10 hours of construction card. It is so much more advantageous than play 5x 10 hours construction cards. A normal non payer would not know that well beccause the chance of getting those two together is very very low. The card combo takes maybe 30 seconds to play. So someone would have to time their attacks within 30 seconds of each other. Also please keep in mind that all a carder has to do is interdict after the first attack to stop other ones so I don't even know how you can get off 7 attacks in a row. With the new interdiction cards, you can basically be on it forever now.
Basically while the x5 speed card is in play, it is useless to attack again as it would only cost 1/5 of the cards to build the castle back. If you combine with the stone structure strenght card, it takes almost double the amount of attacks to bring the castle down. I am pretty certain that 9 out of 10 times if a carder uses the above combo even against 2 carders, they would not succeed in the attack.
I know you can excom. But that is not even effective as you would have to excomm all villages and ensure that the player has no open slots to quickly spawn a new village just for interdiction. All this stuff can be sped up with cards eg, monks speed, captain speed, etc.
I can't even agree it is pay to grow anymore. It is pay to win now. If you have enough money, you can own anyone. All this comparison with alt accounts is pointless. This is just the poor mans way of winning. The rich man can still do the same. If they wanted to they can pay a bunch of their friends or people to legitimately sign up and it would be legal under the terms.
It's not about the players anymore. they don't shape it. It's the persons with the biggest wallets. Basically it could very well be the top 5 guys. I hate to think that the non paying players have no rights and can't ask for fairness. Just in real life, the little guys are needed. Without all the non payers, or small time spenders, the big spenders wouldn't be playing and paying into the games. The same with real life. Without the workers, there would be no one buying the products, no one making them. It is circle relationship. The non paying players need the rich players to pay for the games maintenance, improvement, while the rich players need the non paying players for fun and interaction and unfortunately bullying.
really how fun would it be if it was all rich people? they would all be driving ferraris and it wouldn't be fun anymore. Same with the games, if only heavy carders played, not very many people would even be razed or attacked. The game is pointless without non paying players. Anyway in summary, you need them, it has to be somewhat fair. You can't allow what is really consider cheating in game with all these powerful cards. You can't just say because they aren't paying, they don't contribute anything and so we don't care about them and we can make the cards as strong as we want because that's what paying players want.
@dsds Excellent post! I appreciate your response and couldn't agree more.
As I've often said to people before, I wouldn't use steroids to win an athletic competition (and feel good about what I was doing or as if I'd truly accomplished anything significant) anymore than I would name-drop in order to further myself in my career. If I can't get there on my own merit, then I don't deserve to win/achieve it. There is a vast difference between seizing opportunities that present themselves and exploiting them.
Someone said in global chat the other day that the only people who whine about carders are those who are losing . . . poor attitude to have, but they're entitled to their opinions. I probably use more cards than anyone in my group. I can afford to spend far more than I do on this game, but I don't. It's my choice because I prefer to challenge myself and see what I'm capable of. Fair enough that other people choose to spend more than many of us make in a month on this game. I'm mainly sticking up for those who can't afford to buy crowns, which is the majority of players, I suspect. Quite frankly, I spend most my cards on speed, largely because I'm impatient by nature. lol I hate to wait for scouts, carts, monks and armies . . . . and I use quite a few defense cards against those I know to be heavy carders.
I'm to the point where I'm very tempted to walk away from W9 and let H1 and their allies play with themselves . . . but I have a stubborn streak that would shame a mule and so I just keep fighting . . . but, with a little determination, I think I could overcome that stubbornness just so they are forced to deal with the dead world they've created.
When injustice is law, resistance becomes duty . . .
