People leaving, pvp dying...

I personally think that the main pvp issue actually is that lots of pvpers from both sides have left the game especially darkies I think they left the game for varius reasons and issues that never were fixed or dont called devs attention, I am not sure what are their exactly reasons for leaving but I think there are a few.

- Dragon longbow kitting, and being the only unit capable of kite LIA.
- Light artillery with devastating power and dark one being much less effective than archers.
- Archers OPness and very good CAV killers.
- Defeat of the darkside.
- Population issue with a ligthie overrun.
- Some races CAV sucks compared to the CAV of other races like comparing UD or human cav with elven/orc one.
-Gear battles (no strategy just the guy with the most powerful gear win very frequently not allways).
-Ranged battles (kitting camping), are extremely boring and frustating and darkies lose more often for having inferior ranged units, and light army just need bring as many archers/HI/arty as they can and easily can beat darkies especially when cover suck up there (this is not dwarven case)
- Too low darkies willing to pvp make some ligthies leave or pvp less because they dont like pvp allways against members of the same faction, because darkies have some kind of archerphobia and cannonphobia when they see a ligthie especially a elf and this make other darkies have fear too


These are varius issues I have listened and remember from players and pvpers I think those golems wont be a good touch is most pvpers are gone I am sad for the leaving of many pvp parnerts and now I rarely find darkie parnerts to do 2vs2 and is a little rare find light opponents as well.

Then did there is any plan of a pvp incentive to make people pvp more often? or at least any of these issues (is that these are considered issues) going to be fixed soon?

Well, I'll try to get on someday shortly after gear sets are implemented for some pvp action. It's been a while now since I've sat down and did some pvps. It just seems every time I try I end up not having any fun, due to most of the reasons you mention in your post. That along with me just not having as much expendable time as I used to have, especially for a game that doesn't look like it's going to get much more love in the future.

Gear balance is probably the biggest issue, but now it may be too late to really salvage. There's just not nearly enough people playing anymore for it to matter, unfortunately...

At this point I just have my fingers crossed that Kingdoms Age will be a title worth picking up and won't allow these same silly problems to rise up again. Or that by some black magic, BC popularity picks up again causing it to be profitable again to improve the pvp element of the game (don't see that happening).

It's just sad to see BC dying now so quickly due to problems that should have never happened. If the balance could have been more polished when the game became popular, I feel like this game could still be going strong today, and I would be much more willing to play actively too.  

Oh well, no sense dwelling on could-have-beens.

Ulises21 wrote:

I personally think that the main pvp issue actually is that lots of pvpers from both sides have left the game especially darkies I think they left the game for varius reasons and issues that never were fixed or dont called devs attention, I am not sure what are their exactly reasons for leaving but I think there are a few.

- Dragon longbow kitting, and being the only unit capable of kite LIA.
- Light artillery with devastating power and dark one being much less effective than archers.
- Archers OPness and very good CAV killers.
- Defeat of the darkside.
- Population issue with a ligthie overrun.
- Some races CAV sucks compared to the CAV of other races like comparing UD or human cav with elven/orc one.
-Gear battles (no strategy just the guy with the most powerful gear win very frequently not allways).
-Ranged battles (kitting camping), are extremely boring and frustating and darkies lose more often for having inferior ranged units, and light army just need bring as many archers/HI/arty as they can and easily can beat darkies especially when cover suck up there (this is not dwarven case)
- Too low darkies willing to pvp make some ligthies leave or pvp less because they dont like pvp allways against members of the same faction, because darkies have some kind of archerphobia and cannonphobia when they see a ligthie especially a elf and this make other darkies have fear too


These are varius issues I have listened and remember from players and pvpers I think those golems wont be a good touch is most pvpers are gone I am sad for the leaving of many pvp parnerts and now I rarely find darkie parnerts to do 2vs2 and is a little rare find light opponents as well.

Then did there is any plan of a pvp incentive to make people pvp more often? or at least any of these issues (is that these are considered issues) going to be fixed soon?

Its not only PvP but the game itself that is losing players. I'm not going to try to explain the reasons why because it will most likely not be fixed anyways(very sad)  

Gear balance... ? Can be true, but generaly players with bad gear just play bad too...

Light cannons, too powerful ? What about humans ? Capped my units can't kill dark ones, and you jsut need to be fst to avoid cannons shoots. D:

No marketing = No new traffic

Simple as that....all the rest is just reasons coming out of thin air...

[quote="RuneSlayer"]No marketing = No new traffic

Simple as that....all the rest is just reasons coming out of thin air...[/quote

Ok then   

RuneSlayer wrote:

No marketing = No new traffic

Simple as that....all the rest is just reasons coming out of thin air...

Well, an active population also = new traffic and free advertising, so don't forget that either. People leaving because of game issues when the game could have still technically kept them interested otherwise is never a good thing. Don't get me wrong, BC still has been having a good life in the grand scheme of things, but really it's a good enough game that it could still be going strong now if not for many of the issues that have lead players to leave. Considering it's your guys second(?) game that's pretty damn good, and very much worth being proud of. Some of the issues may have been patchable but a lot of them were built into the design and bandaids were really the most that could be done, like the eternal stalemate.

keep this in mind when making Kingdoms Age. Test like mad so as few of those bad issues get through to the initial product as possible! Because once the game is launched, it becomes way harder to change things. Maybe with all that in mind, KA will go strong for longer than BC. It'd be amazing if it was still bustling after the 4 or 5 year mark, and with the amount of effort that sounds like it's going into the game, it would be a great goal to reach for.   

RuneSlayer wrote:

No marketing = No new traffic

Simple as that....all the rest is just reasons coming out of thin air...

yup, out of thin air, but: now you have them.

and they are legit, all of them. and all of them are at least in part, solvable.

RuneSlayer wrote:

No marketing = No new traffic

Simple as that....all the rest is just reasons coming out of thin air...

There does not appear to be a 'super-sad/misses halcyon days' smiley... how odd....

LSLarry wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:

No marketing = No new traffic

Simple as that....all the rest is just reasons coming out of thin air...

There does not appear to be a 'super-sad/misses halcyon days' smiley... how odd....

Take your pick...

Ulises21 wrote:

I personally think that the main pvp issue actually is that lots of pvpers from both sides have left the game especially darkies I think they left the game for varius reasons and issues that never were fixed or dont called devs attention, I am not sure what are their exactly reasons for leaving but I think there are a few.

- Dragon longbow kitting, and being the only unit capable of kite LIA.
- Light artillery with devastating power and dark one being much less effective than archers.
- Archers OPness and very good CAV killers.
- Defeat of the darkside.
- Population issue with a ligthie overrun.
- Some races CAV sucks compared to the CAV of other races like comparing UD or human cav with elven/orc one.
-Gear battles (no strategy just the guy with the most powerful gear win very frequently not allways).
-Ranged battles (kitting camping), are extremely boring and frustating and darkies lose more often for having inferior ranged units, and light army just need bring as many archers/HI/arty as they can and easily can beat darkies especially when cover suck up there (this is not dwarven case)
- Too low darkies willing to pvp make some ligthies leave or pvp less because they dont like pvp allways against members of the same faction, because darkies have some kind of archerphobia and cannonphobia when they see a ligthie especially a elf and this make other darkies have fear too


These are varius issues I have listened and remember from players and pvpers I think those golems wont be a good touch is most pvpers are gone I am sad for the leaving of many pvp parnerts and now I rarely find darkie parnerts to do 2vs2 and is a little rare find light opponents as well.

Then did there is any plan of a pvp incentive to make people pvp more often? or at least any of these issues (is that these are considered issues) going to be fixed soon?

Btw nice post Ulises21    You deserve plenty of upvotes on this.  

Let me try to elaborate on "No marketing = No traffic"

In a perfect world where money is of no importance and all services are for free, things would be a lot different for everything and for everyone...and definitely for Battle Conquest as well.

What do I mean?

F2P (Free 2 Play) games are....free...to...play...which means that people can just log in and play for as much as they like for...free. At the same time, bear in mind that such an online game has an extensive range of expenses starting from the servers till the people maintaining it and developing it further.

Since F2P games rely on microtransactions, traffic and new players are essential to the longevity and sustainability of a game. You cannot expect the same people to pay again and again... Therefore, you need a continuous stream of new players to play the game so as to have some possibility of a conversion.

Now, taking into consideration that conversion can range from 0.5% - 2% for such games, that means that out of 100 new people only 1 or 2 people will pay something for the game. IF you don't have a continuous stream of new players, then you simply have less and less sales and then the game cannot be sustained any longer.

A few months ago, I made an announcement saying that we had to make a very brave decision to cope with the "experiences" aka problems we had with some publishers, who were supposed to provide us with continuous traffic...something that never happened...

The brave decision was Kingdoms Age.... a different game, a different business model and definitely a step up from Battle Conquest and Pantheon before BC.

IF we continued working solely on BC and we didn't make any "move" towards a different path, then we would continue to update it very regularly, only to have it enjoyed by the same people again and again..until they were bored with the concept and they moved on...Slow...death...for BC and for us...

BC had one of the biggest retentions in Kongregate compared to hundreds of thousands of games, so we believe that we did a very good job on the game. BC however was never meant to be played by a few hundreds of players...Its game design was based on a continuous flow of players, which was not attained...and NOT because of our bad decisions or anything...hence our decision to take things into our own hands...

RuneSlayer wrote:

BC had one of the biggest retentions in Kongregate compared to hundreds of thousands of games, so we believe that we did a very good job on the game. BC however was never meant to be played by a few hundreds of players...Its game design was based on a continuous flow of players, which was not attained...and NOT because of our bad decisions or anything...hence our decision to take things into our own hands...

It's 1 of the bigger hitters on AG as well, but I don't think Ulises meant you/Xargos/Lightshield make bad decisions, but he does draw a very recognizable picture. There are serious signs that the dark side is evaporating.

I believe Klaas is right, when he says : "but: now you have them.

and they are legit, all of them. and all of them are at least in part, solvable."

Oh, Ulises, great post, thumbs up !

Johntheright wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:

BC had one of the biggest retentions in Kongregate compared to hundreds of thousands of games, so we believe that we did a very good job on the game. BC however was never meant to be played by a few hundreds of players...Its game design was based on a continuous flow of players, which was not attained...and NOT because of our bad decisions or anything...hence our decision to take things into our own hands...

It's 1 of the bigger hitters on AG as well, but I don't think Ulises meant you/Xargos/Lightshield make bad decisions, but he does draw a very recognizable picture. There are serious signs that the dark side is evaporating.

I believe Klaas is right, when he says : "but: now you have them.

and they are legit, all of them. and all of them are at least in part, solvable."

Oh, Ulises, great post, thumbs up !  

I never assumed that Ulises thought that way.

I just felt that I had to clarify my previous post.

RuneSlayer wrote:

I just felt that I had to clarify my previous post.

You did and you did it well. The more reason to come forth with a demo for your new game so ppl can experience it themselves before buying it. Personally, I'm curious if I could run it on my laptop. But, that's another topic.

We all understand you guys got hosed by a 3rd party Rune, and I'm sure we'd happily go burn their village down for ya if such things were doable these days...

I guess the elephant in the room here is... Will there ever be more traffic for BC at this point? I really hope so, as I love this game and one of my favourite parts of it is playing with/helping/meeting new people...

There was some mention previously (it fizzled, we got distracted, omg, for reals! ;D) of what players could do to help with promotion... is there someone at AG, Kongregate, or even the mysterious jag-off publishers whom we can contact and harass? Will a lobby of 300 players matter to said person if so?

LSLarry wrote:

We all understand you guys got hosed by a 3rd party Rune, and I'm sure we'd happily go burn their village down for ya if such things were doable these days...

I guess the elephant in the room here is... Will there ever be more traffic for BC at this point?  I really hope so, as I love this game and one of my favourite parts of it is playing with/helping/meeting new people...

There was some mention previously (it fizzled, we got distracted, omg, for reals! ;D) of what players could do to help with promotion... is there someone at AG, Kongregate, or even the mysterious jag-off publishers whom we can contact and harass?  Will a lobby of 300 players matter to said person if so?  

Life is full of challenges LSLarry...

We cannot predict the future of BC, but if I could say one thing...is that Kingdoms Age will be BC and more than that...in a way..we want Kingdoms Age to become what BC was and wasn't but in a much greater scale...in a scale that BC could not ever become...

That is where you guys can help us out...because honestly...we won't be able to do it without you...

Maybe I am a rare breed in this game, but I am a faithful player who actually pays. I enjoy auto-collect and being able to reforge godlike gear, so I'll drop about $20 every month or so. Its about what I used to pay for WoW and I get a lot more enjoyment out of this game, to be honest. BUT, I'm not going to keep paying for a game that is basically a recreation of the last couple months of the American Civil War: dark army of some die-hards who are fighting insurmountable odds against light army. It is demoralizing, bordering on soul-crushing. I make 10K CP a day, on average, and it is pissing in the wind.

If you lose dark, you lose the game. And there are a lot of us that will not make the leap to KA simply because it is a DOWNLOADABLE GAME, not one that can be played through flash on any old computer. I don't play this game for the brilliant graphics, I play it for the strategy.

At the current rate, with the best effort of the darkies who are still playing, light will win in about 3 weeks. And then the rest of dark will leave.

Just my 2 cents.

Damastas wrote:

At the current rate, with the best effort of the darkies who are still playing, light will win in about 3 weeks.  And then the rest of dark will leave.

I'm totally agree with you: 3 or 4 week without changes and this great game will be clinically dead.

RuneSlayer wrote:

No marketing = No new traffic

Simple as that....all the rest is just reasons coming out of thin air...

That's true

but also the ranged boost due for the last major fix concerning units made the pvp a matter of elves.
Every good dwarf with the best HI ever seen can do litle against them kiting fro all the battlefield... And the cavs are killed very fast too before to reach them, even if the ironforts with that fix get some playability that before they haven t .


The last fix was not so good, in my point of view, and must be redesigned.
This could help a bit the pvp. And the dwarves in last war only 4 dwarves were in the first 60 places, and the 4th was the 60th...
The orcs too were not so helped for pvp

Hello,
I have played BC this weekend after long brake.

Game is still fun and addictive

About PVP i have some suggestions to make it better

1. Remove tier 4 from game. Unit on lvl 16 already can have 4 gl items. Difference between tier 4 and 5 is so small that it is no real difference. Even units on lvl 13-14 are almost equal (with right gear) To 19-20, they are very close to cap stats.

suggestion: New tier should replace 4 and 5 tiers and have range 13-20 lvl unit (the highest) and 2250+ CP.

2. Dark arti vs Light arti. In simple words Light arti can change the tide of battle, Dark arti cannot due to it is too weak. Even before FOW dark arti was practicly useless due to inaccuracy and low strenght, it was usefull only to one thing to kill light arti, now with FOW you usually cant see light arti (when you see you are propably under fire of arti and archers and it takes too long to kill light arti, your unit/units will die faster) so dark arti are completely useless. Shooting without LOS is not compensate anything.

Suggestions: make dark arti accurancy equal to light arti (it is still lack of strenght) or make strenght equal of light and dark arti (arti can shot without LOS but it is still more inacurate) or make new unit (arti) to every race so player would decide if he wants stronger ARTI with LOS or weaker and more inacurate without LOS.

This point is very important because it causes great imbalance in PVP.


3. Archers - now they can far too powerfull. Armors are practicly useless and not worth. Units die from archers fire no matter if armor is equipped or not. Second thing is that light side have better archers (especially elfes) so races with better archers should have weaker melee troops.

Suggestions: make armor more worth and/or make arrows less deadly or/and make less shots/per round - 2 or 3 less would be fine with increasing meaning of armors.


4. Cavalry is still useless in PVP. They cost too much AP compare to what they can contribute to battle.

Suggestions: ?????


Thats all thoughts for now

kuba_ wrote:

2. Dark arti vs Light arti. In simple words Light arti can change the tide of battle, Dark arti cannot due to it is too weak. Even before FOW dark arti was practicly useless due to inaccuracy and low strenght, it was usefull only to one thing to kill light arti, now with FOW you usually cant see light arti (when you see you are propably under fire of arti and archers and it takes too long to kill light arti, your unit/units will die faster) so dark arti are completely useless. Shooting without LOS is not compensate anything.

Suggestions: make dark arti accurancy equal to light arti (it is still lack of strenght) or make strenght equal of light and dark arti (arti can shot without LOS but it is still more inacurate) or make new unit (arti) to every race so player would decide if he wants stronger ARTI with LOS or weaker and more inacurate without LOS.

That wouldn't be smart because everyone will buy the Arty with Strong Arty with LOS instead of weak and inaccurate arty......

Maybe make 2 types of Arty:

1. Weak Str but very accurate with a bigger LOS.
2. High Str but inaccurate with normal LOS.

This can also be made the same with cava as suggested in my suggestion on Cava. 2 Types of Cava( light and heavy cava).

Maybe i was not clear enough

With LOS it means that arti need Line of Sight to shoot (light arti now)
Without LOS it means that arti does not need Line of Sight to shoot (dark arti now)

kuba_ wrote:

Maybe i was not clear enough

With LOS it means that arti need Line of Sight to shoot (light arti now)
Without LOS it means that arti does not need Line of Sight to shoot (dark arti now)

Ah ok but mine sound good too.

kuba_ wrote:

1. Remove tier 4 from game. Unit on lvl 16 already can have 4 gl items. Difference between tier 4 and 5 is so small that it is no real difference. Even units on lvl 13-14 are almost equal (with right gear) To 19-20, they are very close to cap stats.

suggestion: New tier should replace 4 and 5 tiers and  have range 13-20 lvl unit (the highest) and 2250+ CP.

2. Dark arti vs Light arti. In simple words Light arti can change the tide of battle, Dark arti cannot due to it is too weak. Even before FOW dark arti was practicly useless due to inaccuracy and low strenght, it was usefull only to one thing to kill light arti, now with FOW you usually cant see light arti (when you see you are propably under fire of arti and archers and it takes too long to kill light arti, your unit/units will die faster) so dark arti are completely useless. Shooting without LOS is not compensate anything.

Suggestions: make dark arti accurancy equal to light arti (it is still lack of strenght) or make strenght equal of light and dark arti (arti can shot without LOS but it is still more inacurate) or make new unit (arti) to every race so player would decide if he wants stronger ARTI with LOS or weaker and more inacurate without LOS.

This point is very important because it causes great imbalance in PVP.


3. Archers - now they can far too powerfull. Armors are practicly useless and not worth. Units die from archers fire no matter if armor is equipped or not. Second thing is that light side have better archers (especially elfes) so races with better archers should have weaker melee troops.

Suggestions: make armor more worth and/or make arrows less deadly or/and make less shots/per round - 2 or 3 less would be fine with increasing meaning of armors.


4. Cavalry is still useless in PVP. They cost too much AP compare to what they can contribute to battle.

I agree on all points. 1- right, here are yet too few players for t5, uniting the 2 tiets will lead to unlimited (till the barrack limit) full epic battles!
2- I still believe that indirect fire gives a good tactic advantage forcing the opponent to move, where the direct fire is great for defending. Giving to both sides the chance to have both kind of artillery fire will erase the arbitrary difference between the 2 and stop once forever this neverending topic.
3- Already typed elsewhere a lot about. Agree at 100%.
4- Absolutely (even if some players think the cavs in pvp are great. 1 or 2 in t5 are useful, but their cost is overvalued for their effectiveness imo).