Incoming changes and new Features

Overall great stuff Rune, good going and nice to see you back on the forums.

I like all the changes including nr 8. It has been very true over months that very few active players can "rule" the cp board, even take or defend tiles on their own. My personal record for one day was about 65 battles, the impact on the economy and cp is nothing to underestimate and there are ppl who were or are doing such daily.  And i strongly agree that has to be bound by certain limits.  The power of a faction has to return back to the masses.

As any negotiations start - you propose an extremum "cp count for everything", players counter with another extremum "nooooo", and in the end some compromise is being reached. As it stands right now pvp is a rare and timid being - because the unrewarded losses and the lack of opponents. Anything improving that part of the game is a good step forward. But as already stated if pvp would count to the current CP-pool ppl wouldnt be discouraged to do it. Average pvp battles are being done far below own AP-limits because one cant equip all units equally good or same tier opponents dont/cant field huge armies. An average won pvp battle yields less rewards than a won nightmare battle. Limiting pvp by current CP is uncalled for. On the other hand endless pvp is a considerable threat to abuse IF such pvp battles are arranged, as nr. 1 "duels" mentions.

CP-consumption for coops. Tough call. It would require a different counter imho, else nobody who can run nightmare will ever coop. Add another counter with another timer, that will also handle arranged pvp. It should not have faster regeneration or bigger storage than solo.

TLDR battle limits:
-> Limit arranged pvp and coop with another counter
-> No limits for random pvp
-> Limit number of arranged pvp with same player to 3 per day! Counter exploiting.

--------------
Rewards is something i was going to mention for a while now. Current system is bad. It is using purchase cost of units to calculate healcost and rewards. Currently each unit we take to battle generates rewards that are modified by its level and the base (gametype e.g. coop/nightmare etc.). I find it silly for many reasons. Different races earn different rewards using identical setup. It has been putting dwarves FAR behind other races who are able to run 5-6 cavaleries efficiently. While those cav setups are fun, and i personally run one myself, they are nowhere close to a ballanced army. Also seeing that 6cav+4li generate a lot more income than 3Hi 3Arti 4Archers while both armies have same AP and same levels is not good - it is slightly ballanced by the higher healcost cavaleries have to bear but thats not enough. Also at current lvl there is no motivation to use items and many many players are fielding naked units across the board. What i find good right now - that lvl of units matters and the godlike equipped noobs dont earn more than rare equipped veterans fielding same AP.

I like the fact you are going to change the reward system, but i still want to suggest some modifications to it.
-> remove the typedependant calculation. No reason why artillery should earn less than cavalery, and no reason why light assault should earn less than archers. Instead modify the rewards by fielded AP - this will motivate players to use items again - very important for economy. In addition add a "ballanced army multiplier". 5% higher rewards per different unit type starting at core of 2 and capping at 15%. In other words if a player uses HI+Archers he gets 100% rewards, by adding a light infantry unit he gets 5% more, by adding a cavalery units he gets another 5% more and by adding a merc or light assault or artillery he again gets another 5%, reaching the 15% bonus cap. Future endgame armies may look like: 2HI+2LI+2Lia+3Cav+1Arti/Merc. More fun more tactics more challenge more skill more rewards
That will help ppl to field ballanced armies that are multipurpose and adjustable to any situation, also MUCH harder to use and coordinate which may result in more losses. This will reward the best of the best additionally to your general's performance idea. It will not entirely discourage monosetups like 6cav+4lia, but it will encourage players to experiment and develop new tactics and strategies without losing on payment.

TLDR Reward system:
-> Calculate rewards by army points + nr. of units but not unit types. More fairness to all races, same rewards for everybody.
-> Add ballanced army multiplier: 5% more reward per different unit in the army.
-> Keep the unit-lvl modificator in the calculation to reward active players for their longterm contributions.

And some jester's licence
I always laugh when i read stuff like "boooh bad devs if you do this or that i will quit, i will stop buying gems, i will sue you"
(that last one is my favourite and even topped someones "i payed for this - respect my wishes, i am the center of the universe ". Get real folks, seriously.
A hint to whoever may want to complain about the idea to "nerf" 6 cav formats (its not a nerf-idea - its encouragement for more ballanced formats). Besides if whoever will speak is a dark legion player - bear in mind your argument is less valid because you currently earn more than anybody else in the game. Not cool not fair.

Devs keep up the good work, we love you even with experimental changes

Great post, Tibr!

Thank you all for your welcome posts, though I was never truly away.

I love this Community....

To your questions!

nathor wrote:

but I fear top players will still be a bit abandoned there in the top tiers with their top tech and level 10+ armies not being able to match many(can you give us optional handicap so we lower our tier and be able to find matches?)

No matter what handicap we give to high level armies, the battle will always feel imbalanced against a low level army. However, we will probably increase the reserves cap so more units can be recruited, which although doesn't solve this issue 100%, but at least it provides some sort of a solution.

Then again, we will soon introduce the PvAIP battles. (Player Vs AI controlled player armies)

One more solution...which may or may not be easily to be implemented and it should be the mother of all solutions for PVP. The option to decrease the level of your units so you can create various Tiers armies. For example, I have an army comprised of units which are level 10-12. I cannot see anyone in my PvP Tier online, but I can see players in other Tiers. Although I know that I could play against an AI controlled player army if I wanted, I prefer to play against a human player. So, I decrease their levels to level 6 and then immediately I can play in a smaller Tier! GS limitations still count and of course bonuses will be deducted to facilitate the level reduction.

nathor wrote:

i love this! will we have a separate army configuration like "AI pvp army set" ? can you make recording of these battles? lol! i am soo greedy! please do it, its great!

Something like that Nathor. Recording of battles is .....complicated at the moment. Very doable, but it will require a lot of development time and we are still behind development wise. However, we WANT to have battle replays for a lot of reasons. We think it will be great.

nathor wrote:

hmm, they type of units we bring will matter? and how much? await details to judge but seems ok.

No, the type of units will not matter. More details on the coming days!

nathor wrote:

really no way, for me this will be a game killer. i wont wait to play or pay to play if you end up selling those command points. a great thing about this game is that you can play as much as you want at least in coop mode. i will most surely leave the game if devs dont lets us grind as much as we want or nerf free grinding to unacceptable levels... just dont do it!

I decided to NOT do it.

nathor wrote:

good! still to see if it is a good deal to grind with them... their loot might not pay up their fees.

Of course their loot will pay up their fees! lol The feature is live, so go and check them out!

nathor wrote:

sell what? salted elfs?

With the trading agreements Guilds will be able to trade resources, fragments, items and other stuff (coming up) with other Guilds. Also, Leaders, Vice Leaders and Treasurers will be able to send to their Guild Members anything that lies in the Guild Vault.

Fyrr wrote:

Prepare for some people whining how I spam about duels then. Works for dark vs dark too, riiiight? Details when available, seems nice so far.

Which is why we will add a "Do not accept Duels" flag for annoying people like you! lol

Fyrr wrote:

Long timer would be bad. And you're saying I couldn't bring 3 lvl 13 units? Small ap, high level... Level and army size don't need to be connected. I don't want to pvp only with large armies. I hope you didn't mean that.

It is not going to be a long timer. It might be possible to field 3 lvl 13 units, but I guess they will have to be overgeared. Check one of my points above for one more mechanism we are considering.

Fyrr wrote:

And right, now people try to get that +25 AP advantage, so they will start getting 200 ap advantage!

You have Feather Weight, Light Weight, Heavy Weight "Tiers" in boxing. Boxers always try to be as close to the limit of their category as possible to gain that extra advantage in muscle weight.

Fyrr wrote:

Ai controlled stuff - what armies? Does it mean it's possible to get a specific offline player with +drop pve gear to mirror that army for the hungry pvper to kill? Or random player? Or same player's mirror version? Affecting the AI player's winrate?..
Damn I'd reaaaally like to get some offline lighties armies to vs. So much potential... Smile

Well, the basic idea is that the player creates a garrison army, which will be "defending" against PvP players. I don't think you want to create a garrison army with PVE gear, right? Especially, when THAT player can steal resources........right? Then again, if he steal your resources, you can always take your revenge by attacking him and get your resources and some back. Don't worry...it will be extremely balanced and we won't allow players to steal your resources 24/7.

Fyrr wrote:

Prestige... Well if it will be possible to pvp more, then ok, but if not... It could end with like 30 people having the same prestige and only 20 getting the reward? (eg if all of them got 1 pvp in that time and got +5 additional..). What rewards..? For all pvp participants or only winners? I see some problems either way, but meh not a good place to discuss too much.

It is a competition Fyrr. The player with the most Prestige Points wins. Simple as that. Yes, there will be several reward levels.

Fyrr wrote:

(coughand my past PMcough)

What PM? My PM storage is flooded.....lol

XViper wrote:

How does it choose which units they have available to field? ie. If the player has 15 units in his/her barracks, will it create some kind of balanced army from all available units?
Will item durability be affected for the gear of the AI controlled player?
Are the rewards for the 'AI player' winning the same as it would be if it was player controlled?

As I explained above, the player will set a garrison army, which will be used against PVP attacks. Item durability of the AI controlled army will not be affected. Rewards for the AI player will not be the same, but still they will be rewards. Prestige points WILL be awarded though.

XViper wrote:

I LOVE you.... seriously, and I HATE you at the same time.

But please, more information. How will they be 'transmuted'? What are the chances? How many fragments do you need to use?

Like, combining 5 Uncommons gives you a rare? Or has a 50% chance to give you a rare? If you fail, what happens? Do you lose all the fragments you put in? Details! Smile

Well, there will be 8 slots in total. 4 normal slots, 2 slots called "Stabilizers" and 2 more slots called "Catalysts" Stabilizers and Catalysts will require Gems. Stabilizers will increase the success chance of the transmutation while Catalysts will increase the probability of obtaining a higher fragment rarity depending on the Catalyst quality. Depending on the rarity of fragments used you get a success chance and several fragment rarities that can be obtained. If you fail, then you just lose 1 random fragment.

XViper wrote:

However you might need to check some balancing. As generals performance is now included (which I think is a great idea), you might find people able to benefit much more from easily wiping Normals, than playing Nightmares. If winning a Normal becomes more profitable than winning a Nightmare, you have a problem. Just something worth considering.

That won't happen, as the Base Rewards are derived by the battle difficulty and all the rest (number of units, general's performance, etc.) are simply modifiers to the formula.

XViper wrote:

Will make people use Mercs at least Smile. However; details?
Depending on type and level of the unit - Means what exactly?
How will this compare to the generation of regular troops?

It is already live! Let me just say that certain types and at certain levels they are quite...profitable...

XViper wrote:

Does this mean Guild Vault?
You mentioned 'soon' again.... >_>
No one likes that word.....

That is correct. Guild Vault. Well, history has shown that it is better to keep your mouth shut, than giving dates and fail to deliver. So....Soon...

XViper wrote:

A big thank you to you too RuneSlayer. You (and the other Devs) cop a lot of shit, and us (the players) are never shy at dishing it out. You might not always explain yourself fully initially, but you always have the patience to get there in the end. Because lets face it, very rarely will a player understand the logic behind a Devs decisions or ideas, especially if it negatively affects them in any way.

I have said it before...I will say it again.... YOU are our driving force... Your love, support and dedication to the game is what gives us energy to go on and on.... This "trip" is tiring both mentally and physically, but your comments and love towards the game provide all the energy we need.

Bobba wrote:

I agree with Fyrr, allow players to duel other players of the same faction in addition to opposite faction, and it will be shining, shimmering, splendid. It will be much easier to find pvp partners this way. And I will be a very happy Bobba.

Who said we won't allow PvP in the same Faction, when it comes to Duels?

Tibr wrote:

TLDR battle limits:
-> Limit arranged pvp and coop with another counter
-> No limits for random pvp
-> Limit number of arranged pvp with same player to 3 per day! Counter exploiting.

You just wait.

Tibr wrote:

TLDR Reward system:
-> Calculate rewards by army points + nr. of units but not unit types. More fairness to all races, same rewards for everybody.
-> Add ballanced army multiplier: 5% more reward per different unit in the army.
-> Keep the unit-lvl modificator in the calculation to reward active players for their longterm contributions.

Again...you just wait...though I have already given some information about it. And yes, the current reward system is BAD....and has a very big impact in the game economy.

Tibr wrote:

A hint to whoever may want to complain about the idea to "nerf" 6 cav formats (its not a nerf-idea - its encouragement for more ballanced formats

Now, THAT was a mistake on our behalf. Currently it is possible to field 2 LI with OVER THE TOP GS and then 6 lvl 3 Cavalry units. Although it would satisfy the 30% Infantry/Missile rule, it is completely wrong because it includes GS as well. As you can understand it is a KILLER combination with impact hits coming from 6 units! We have changed it so it only calculates the base value of the units (Without GS that is) in order to check for the 30% limitation. It makes more sense now...

Tibr wrote:

Devs keep up the good work, we love you even with experimental changes Razz

We love you too!

Tibr wrote:

Overall great stuff Rune, good going and nice to see you back on the forums.

I like all the changes including nr 8. It has been very true over months that very few active players can "rule" the cp board, even take or defend tiles on their own. My personal record for one day was about 65 battles, the impact on the economy and cp is nothing to underestimate and there are ppl who were or are doing such daily.  And i strongly agree that has to be bound by certain limits.  The power of a faction has to return back to the masses.

not true... some players are more influential, when i see the top player cps within in the context of a guild action, its hardly 20% and top players already have a CP cap. by the way. and there is many mid level players growing and they already make a huge difference.
the question here is not give the balance back to the masses, but give the balance back to the inactives and casual players. ah! that is ridiculous! why to do that?

Tibr wrote:

Average pvp battles are being done far below own AP-limits because one cant equip all units equally good or same tier opponents dont/cant field huge armies. An average won pvp battle yields less rewards than a won nightmare battle. Limiting pvp by current CP is uncalled for.

agree!

Tibr wrote:

CP-consumption for coops. Tough call. It would require a different counter imho, else nobody who can run nightmare will ever coop. Add another counter with another timer, that will also handle arranged pvp. It should not have faster regeneration or bigger storage than solo.

whatever count arrangements you can do, if you slow the playing pace and players have to wait 30 minutes for the next play, that is basically sending the players to go play other games. and slowly disconnect from the game. allow continuous playing allways!

Tibr wrote:

TLDR battle limits:
-> Limit arranged pvp and coop with another counter

for arranged coops and pvps i agree.

Tibr wrote:

Also at current lvl there is no motivation to use items and many many players are fielding naked units across the board. What i find good right now - that lvl of units matters and the godlike equipped noobs dont earn more than rare equipped veterans fielding same AP.

i want to use items for drop rate. i dont use them because of hassle and because of this complete distortion of the AI when using items on solo, especially on NM.

Tibr wrote:

-> Add ballanced army multiplier: 5% more reward per different unit in the army.

ugh, dead weigh units to allways carry to battles and pin us to some position... argh, no!

Tibr wrote:

-> Keep the unit-lvl modificator in the calculation to reward active players for their longterm contributions.

sure.

RuneSlayer wrote:

Thank you all for your welcome posts, though I was never truly away.
.

ping from time to time... a "we read you but too busy" would be enough!

nathor wrote:

but I fear top players will still be a bit abandoned there in the top tiers with their top tech and level 10+ armies not being able to match many(can you give us optional handicap so we lower our tier and be able to find matches?)

No matter what handicap we give to high level armies, the battle will always feel imbalanced against a low level army. However, we will probably increase the reserves cap so more units can be recruited, which although doesn't solve this issue 100%, but at least it provides some sort of a solution.

Then again, we will soon introduce the PvAIP battles. (Player Vs AI controlled player armies)

nathor wrote:

One more solution...which may or may not be easily to be implemented and it should be the mother of all solutions for PVP. The option to decrease the level of your units so you can create various Tiers armies. For example, I have an army comprised of units which are level 10-12. I cannot see anyone in my PvP Tier online, but I can see players in other Tiers. Although I know that I could play against an AI controlled player army if I wanted, I prefer to play against a human player. So, I decrease their levels to level 6 and then immediately I can play in a smaller Tier! GS limitations still count and of course bonuses will be deducted to facilitate the level reduction.

i like it very much , i think that was what i meant with optional handicap.(it should be an option like you tick a check box and , your army setup lowers a few levels) it would allow us poor top level players to lower ourselfs and fight with the masses.

Quote :

nathor wrote:

i love this! will we have a separate army configuration like "AI pvp army set" ? can you make recording of these battles? lol! i am soo greedy! please do it, its great!

Something like that Nathor. Recording of battles is .....complicated at the moment. Very doable, but it will require a lot of development time and we are still behind development wise. However, we WANT to have battle replays for a lot of reasons. We think it will be great.

i understand... its a distant wishlist...  the PVPai its a great idea!

Quote :

I decided to NOT do it.

you floated that out just to scare us didn't you... lol!

Quote :

Of course their loot will pay up their fees! lol The feature is live, so go and check them out!

hmmmm, will do!

Quote :

With the trading agreements Guilds will be able to trade resources, fragments, items and other stuff (coming up) with other Guilds. Also, Leaders, Vice Leaders and Treasurers will be able to send to their Guild Members anything that lies in the Guild Vault.

i know some guilds that will be happy. and some gem players will sponsor their guild mates constructions... its good, they help support the game.

RuneSlayer wrote:

One more solution...which may or may not be easily to be implemented and it should be the mother of all solutions for PVP. The option to decrease the level of your units so you can create various Tiers armies.

Not too many things at once. But yes!!. Along with more units in barracks.
Now I have to kill my cannon in pvps to prevent it from leveling up...

RuneSlayer wrote:

Recording of battles is .....complicated at the moment. Very doable, but it will require a lot of development time and we are still behind development wise. However, we WANT to have battle replays for a lot of reasons. We think it will be great.

Behind? Hah! Just don't forget this idea for now. Fixing pvp is a priority, otherwise there won't be anything to replay.

RuneSlayer wrote:

I decided to NOT do it.

Typical, scaring us once in a while. =)

RuneSlayer wrote:

With the trading agreements Guilds will be able to trade.... with other Guilds. Also, Leaders, Vice Leaders and Treasurers will be able to send to their Guild Members anything that lies in the Guild Vault.

Possible between dark and light guild? And... sending to a particular player by entering his name or choosing from the looong list? Or what.?

RuneSlayer wrote:

Which is why we will add a "Do not accept Duels" flag for annoying people like you! lol

Thanks, I like you too  
You mean like muting, permanent? I suggest a 3 or 5 day flag. And those few pvp-hungry darkies aren't THAT bad.

RuneSlayer wrote:

Well, the basic idea is that the player creates a garrison army, which will be "defending" against PvP players. I don't think you want to create a garrison army with PVE gear, right? ;)Especially, when THAT player can steal resources........right? ;)Then again, if he steal your resources, you can always take your revenge by attacking him and get your resources and some back. Don't worry...it will be extremely balanced and we won't allow players to steal your resources 24/7.

Hm.. So keeping pvp geared units and not using them anywhere else? What ap? Maybe someone attacks with 2.8k ap, someone else with 300 ap... How to solve that?
Gearing for pvp/pve already takes long. We really need item sets or some way to regear more easily.  

Stealing? Not a good idea at all... First it calls for limiting the attacks wayyyy too much, second, one of the reasons this game is better than many more is that there are no physical attacks. Almost impossible to get it just right, waste of time. Reconsider it.
What is wrong with allowing to attack with no penalty for the defender? Attacker can get rewards like after any other battle. Otherwise there will be a small bunch of players attacking everyone else and the rest being unhappy. You don't want that.

And for example I might like to attack a particular player 10 times in one day. With your idea, it wouldn't be possible, and even if possible, can be quite costly. I prefer people wouldn't lose anything in such cases and if their army wins, they get rewards (yes, even lighties). And a pool of attack points (like 20 per day) vs whoever would be enough to avoid exploiting.  

RuneSlayer wrote:

What PM? My PM storage is flooded.....lol

  Hah, people =) Fine, later, if you can't find it. (those dwarves... always misplacing stuff)

RuneSlayer wrote:

Stabilizers and Catalysts will require Gems. Stabilizers will increase the success chance of the transmutation while Catalysts will increase the probability of obtaining a higher fragment rarity depending on the Catalyst quality.

So no way to increase chances without paying? Meh. Why not additional researches? :/ ANY way to get a godlike frag from a bunch of commons? Takes time or is instant?

anywayyyy... Less limits, more rewards in the pvp area, that's the most important thing for now.

Tibr wrote:

endless pvp is a considerable threat to abuse IF such pvp battles are arranged, as nr. 1 "duels" mentions.
Limit number of arranged pvp with same player to 3 per day! Counter exploiting.

Duels won't give rewards?.. So why limit that? Though I'd maybe like if they'd reward anyone who fights me.  

We can, in theory, endlessly pvp even now, and so many arranging takes place in global or mail... Even me vs you, it was arranged...  
Arranged pvps and exploiting... Well... Bullshit, they need no limiting. I used to fight with Faer like 15 times a day, winning about 50% or less. Or with some others. Half of the fun is running slightly changed armies again and again vs the same opponent, testing strategies, trying out stuff. Don't you dare to say that such pvping is wrong if both players agree! Ask Faer or Nethack, they both developed into great strategists by fighting me many many times and learning to defeat me, making me improve along with them. Beautiful! And a few more lighties lately with so much potential... <3

I never noticed any exploiting so far, it still needs too much effort and takes too long to be abused. Simply too tiring and the rewards aren't so good. If you talk about losing on purpose... Almost no one would agree to be the loser =p. People won't get rich doing that, or won't earn more cps than doing eg. coops. This was almost a problem in the old days, but not now.

Fyrr wrote:

Possible between dark and light guild? And... sending to a particular player by entering his name or choosing from the looong list? Or what.?

Trading Agreements/Contracts are initiated by the Leader, Vice Leader and the Treasurer of a Guild. It is not between 2 persons, but rather between 2 Guilds or between a Guild and its members. The 2 Guilds need to either be allies or have a Trading Pact, therefore it is not possible to trade with a Guild from the enemy Faction.

Fyrr wrote:

Thanks, I like you too Crying or Very sad
You mean like muting, permanent? I suggest a 3 or 5 day flag. And those few pvp-hungry darkies aren't THAT bad.

lol...

Nobody can "mute" a player to prevent receiving Duel invites from him, BUT a player can disable the Duel function so as not to receive ANY Duel invites from ANYONE. If a player doesn't want to play a PvP match or receive a Duel, there should be a function which prevents spamming... That's what it is.

Fyrr wrote:

Hm.. So keeping pvp geared units and not using them anywhere else? What ap? Maybe someone attacks with 2.8k ap, someone else with 300 ap... How to solve that?

I never said that you prepare an army as a Garrison Army and then you should not touch it. You assign it as a Garrison Army and that won't prevent you from using it. Most of the times offline players' armies will be chosen, so there is no problem there. A player CANNOT target another player. Let me explain how it will work.

So, it is typical Fyrr who wants to pawn people in PvP (typical....grin) So he prepares his army and enters the PvP queue. Unfortunately there is no player in the Tier he entered, so after a time period, the system finds an "equivalent" offline player's army, which will be controlled by the AI, to play against. TADA! Balanced PVP, REALLY CHALLENGING gameplay...as there are no handicaps there and Fyrr will have to play against a geared player's army ready to kick butts.

Fyrr wrote:

Stealing? Not a good idea at all... First it calls for limiting the attacks wayyyy too much, second, one of the reasons this game is better than many more is that there are no physical attacks. Almost impossible to get it just right, waste of time. Reconsider it.
What is wrong with allowing to attack with no penalty for the defender? Attacker can get rewards like after any other battle. Otherwise there will be a small bunch of players attacking everyone else and the rest being unhappy. You don't want that.

And for example I might like to attack a particular player 10 times in one day. With your idea, it wouldn't be possible, and even if possible, can be quite costly. I prefer people wouldn't lose anything in such cases and if their army wins, they get rewards (yes, even lighties). And a pool of attack points (like 20 per day) vs whoever would be enough to avoid exploiting

I have to disagree...But I understand your concerns as you don't have all the info about this new mechanic. Allow me:

- You cannot target a specific player.
- A player can be "robbed" only once per X hours, therefore there is no griefing.
- It adds some more competition to the game and prepares the way for a "mini game" which we want to introduce...( hint hint)


Great posts all!

If the object was to completely stop the purchasing of resources, I think you've succeeded.

What was that, a 20x increase in price?

RuneSlayer wrote:

4) Tournaments

We will introduce a Prestige point system. Prestige points can be acquired by participating in PvP battles. Every week a Tournament will be held and the first 20 players with the most Prestige Points will be rewarded accordingly. A Tournament ranking system will be used to show the status of each player. Bear in mind that performance in battle will be rewarded with additional Prestige Points. (Eg. Less than 45% APs casualties = 5 additional Prestige Points awarded)

5) Weekly Achievements and News window

8 Weekly Achievements will be introduced, which will be shown in the News screen.

- Faction Supremacy (The Faction which gathered the most CPs)

- Guild Supremacy (The Guild which gathered the most CPs)

- PvP Annihilator (The Player who won the most PvP matches)

- Bloodthirsty (The player who won the most battles)

- MVP Star (The player who earned the most MVPs in battles)

- BattleLord (The player who earned the most CPs)

- Crafter Extraordinaire (The player who crafted the most items)

- Guild Benefactor (The player who made the biggest donations to his Guild)

The achievements will be calculated at the end of each week and the players gaining 1st page will receive an Achievement and unlock a special title. Each Achievement will have 3 levels representing the number of times the player succeeded in gaining a particular achievement. These Achievements will be shown in the new Battle Preloader.

As for the Patch notes, currently shown in the News every time you open them, they will be just a link redirecting the player to the appropriate thread.

Most excited for these two.
 
Even though I probably won't win anything  

RuneSlayer wrote:

Hi all!

We wanted to inform you about some new features that we are working on and some changes coming up.

1) Duels

Players will be able to challenge other players in PvP with an invitation system.

2) PvP Tiers (Yet another change)

The 5 Tiers we introduced a while ago will remain, but the system will change a bit in an effort to provide a faster matching process.

- Each Tier will have a range of APs. For example, Tier 1 will be 500 - 700, Tier 2 1000 - 1200, Tier 3 1500 - 1700 etc.

- Each Tier will have a max unit level limitation. For example, Tier 1 up to lvl 4, Tier 2 up to lvl 8, Tier 3 up to lvl 12 etc.

- Each Tier will provide different bonuses (Loot, CPs/Influence, Drop Rate) exactly as it currently is.

Once at least 2 players are in the same Tier, then they will be matched no matter what their APs are. No more trying to create armies of almost exactly the same APs to be matched. A timer will be introduced in order to facilitate matches of more than 2 players i.e. 2 Vs 2.

Example: In order to play on Tier 1, a player will have to create an army of an AP value ranging from 500 - 700 and fielding units with levels no higher than 4.

3) PvP with AI controlled players' armies

If for any reason a player cannot find in a specific time interval anyone to play against in a specific Tier, then the system will try to match him against an AI controlled player army. This means that a human player will play against the units of another player, exactly as they are. If the human player wins, then he receives all rewards normally, but if the AI wins, then the player whose army was AI controlled, will receive a reward instead.

4) Tournaments

We will introduce a Prestige point system. Prestige points can be acquired by participating in PvP battles. Every week a Tournament will be held and the first 20 players with the most Prestige Points will be rewarded accordingly. A Tournament ranking system will be used to show the status of each player. Bear in mind that performance in battle will be rewarded with additional Prestige Points. (Eg. Less than 45% APs casualties = 5 additional Prestige Points awarded)

5) Weekly Achievements and News window

8 Weekly Achievements will be introduced, which will be shown in the News screen.

- Faction Supremacy (The Faction which gathered the most CPs)

- Guild Supremacy (The Guild which gathered the most CPs)

- PvP Annihilator (The Player who won the most PvP matches)

- Bloodthirsty (The player who won the most battles)

- MVP Star (The player who earned the most MVPs in battles)

- BattleLord (The player who earned the most CPs)

- Crafter Extraordinaire (The player who crafted the most items)

- Guild Benefactor (The player who made the biggest donations to his Guild)

The achievements will be calculated at the end of each week and the players gaining 1st page will receive an Achievement and unlock a special title. Each Achievement will have 3 levels representing the number of times the player succeeded in gaining a particular achievement. These Achievements will be shown in the new Battle Preloader.

As for the Patch notes, currently shown in the News every time you open them, they will be just a link redirecting the player to the appropriate thread.

6) Fragments transmutation

The players will be able to combine fragments in an effort to create a higher rarity fragment.

7) Healing Costs and Loot System

The Loot System will change and healing costs will be reduced. In an effort to normalize the economy, the new loot system when a player wins a battle will work as follows:

Base Loot (+-15%) + General's Performance (+5% to 15% bonus) + No. of Units in Battle

Base Loot: Depends on the battle difficulty. Easy/Normal/Hard/COOP/Nightmare/PvP

General's Performance: Depends on how good a player did in battle (Number of APs lost in the battle)

No. of Units in Battle: For each unit brought in battle, there will be an additional modifier which will generate more loot

8 ) Command Points will be used for COOPs and PvPs as well.

9) Mercenary units will generate loot depending on the type and level of the unit.

10) Trading Agreements between Guilds and between Guilds and Guild Members will soon be enabled.

So number 2, 7 & 9 have all happened.

When can we expect the rest?

I'm most interested in Fragment transmutation and the long long long awaited Guild Vault features.