Dear core-players and fans,
As some of you have voiced their extreme displeasure with the recent balancing changes, I want to take the opportunity to write you the lengthy explanation I believe you deserve. Let me add that I am personally very saddened by the notion of possibly losing you to our game, as all of you are extremely supportive and engaged members of the CON community, much known and respected in the development team. In the past I have done my best to keep and open and honest approach communicating complicated decisions and you and most other members of the "core" community have proven me right in my strategy. Let me thus explain in all detail why we decided to roll back on the research pricing, and why there cannot be an easy solution:
When we released the third slot and new research prices last week, our hope was to both allow more researches while creating demand for more resources by filling all slots - evening out the price reduction. This strategy failed. As simple as that. Immediately after the release we could monitor a very noticeable drop in premium spending which didn't balance out, and just got worse. Of course, one could point to this being our own fault for trying it out in the first place - and that may be even true from a business perspective. From a game-design and creative point though, I am proud to say that our team has, and will continue to experiment, making the game better and more interesting, for instance by creating a third research slot even without having total security that it works economically. Because not trying out new things would mean extremely conservative and slow gradual changes. Possibly good for business, but neither fun nor providing the opportunity of pushing the game we all love and believe in (and play ourselves) to new horizons. So we had to revert, simply because we need a functioning economy to allow us to also remain developing it in the future. I am absolutely convinced that you and every other member in the core-community will eventually understand my reasoning and hopefully continue supporting us, as you have done so valiantly in the past.
Lastly, I want to touch on the new research pricing structure and explain it a bit more in depth:
Over the past year we have tried several different approaches for the pricing of researches. The bigger issue is the lack of resources early and abundance of resources later in the game. One could say: Early in the game players have time but no cash - later they have cash but no time... obviously I am abstracting here, but I think you get my drift. Now researches, as you all will agree, are one of the more fun and rewarding parts of the game. And as much as we would like to enable everyone to research at their hearts content, we need to check and balance it for both economical as well as game-mechanical reasons. A few months back we decided to have "tiered" units - essentially not really increasing stats unless reaching a new tier, of which we have three in the game usually: Level 1, Level 4 (often) and level 6 or 7 (depending). These are symbolized by new unit graphics. This was mirrored by the research costs - Tier one costing the same, tier two costing the same and so on.
This game design decision was challenged quickly by many players - and rightfully so. Players (and I include myself here) simply prefer a gradual increase of HP, combat stats and features. It's more rewarding and it’s more fun, thus leading us to slowly soften up the old tiers until we essentially abandoned them more or less completely, all the while retaining the old "stepped" research price system. When last week’s update hit, this was essentially the nail in the coffin for said system. It just didn't work any longer, and I gladly abandoned it for a more logical and intuitive linear increasing system. Most combat units over the progression of all levels of research more or less double their combat value, incorporating offensive and defensive stats, hit points and features. Researches in turn now slowly increase in price to about 150% of their starting values, making it worthwhile to invest while still serving as a “sink” for later game resource abundance. In turn the later researches require much more time, a luxury we can now afford because we are providing three instead of two slots.
Finally I would like to show you how the new system is NOT more expensive or unfair than the old one. Let’s for example compare the Rare Resource prices for Motorized Infantry old/new: A week ago you were paying a total of 11.263 Rares while researching said unit from level 1 to level 7. Today you are paying a total of 11.925 Rares for the same levels of research. The difference is a measly 663 Rare Resources, distributed over 7 levels and 26 days. Reason for this difference simply lies in the fact that we now use an intuitive +10% cost system. So if you still feel that a level increase of 94 Rare Resources comprises an unbearable and inaffordable price hike, then unfortunately I am afraid all my long explanation and justification will not convince you otherwise. For all other players I hope you follow my lead and enjoy the game as it should be – fun to play, trying to balance out pay and free economy while ever improving and evolving.
Yours sincerely,
Germanico
Creative Director
Dorado Games
As some of you have voiced their extreme displeasure with the recent balancing changes, I want to take the opportunity to write you the lengthy explanation I believe you deserve. Let me add that I am personally very saddened by the notion of possibly losing you to our game, as all of you are extremely supportive and engaged members of the CON community, much known and respected in the development team. In the past I have done my best to keep and open and honest approach communicating complicated decisions and you and most other members of the "core" community have proven me right in my strategy. Let me thus explain in all detail why we decided to roll back on the research pricing, and why there cannot be an easy solution:
When we released the third slot and new research prices last week, our hope was to both allow more researches while creating demand for more resources by filling all slots - evening out the price reduction. This strategy failed. As simple as that. Immediately after the release we could monitor a very noticeable drop in premium spending which didn't balance out, and just got worse. Of course, one could point to this being our own fault for trying it out in the first place - and that may be even true from a business perspective. From a game-design and creative point though, I am proud to say that our team has, and will continue to experiment, making the game better and more interesting, for instance by creating a third research slot even without having total security that it works economically. Because not trying out new things would mean extremely conservative and slow gradual changes. Possibly good for business, but neither fun nor providing the opportunity of pushing the game we all love and believe in (and play ourselves) to new horizons. So we had to revert, simply because we need a functioning economy to allow us to also remain developing it in the future. I am absolutely convinced that you and every other member in the core-community will eventually understand my reasoning and hopefully continue supporting us, as you have done so valiantly in the past.
Lastly, I want to touch on the new research pricing structure and explain it a bit more in depth:
Over the past year we have tried several different approaches for the pricing of researches. The bigger issue is the lack of resources early and abundance of resources later in the game. One could say: Early in the game players have time but no cash - later they have cash but no time... obviously I am abstracting here, but I think you get my drift. Now researches, as you all will agree, are one of the more fun and rewarding parts of the game. And as much as we would like to enable everyone to research at their hearts content, we need to check and balance it for both economical as well as game-mechanical reasons. A few months back we decided to have "tiered" units - essentially not really increasing stats unless reaching a new tier, of which we have three in the game usually: Level 1, Level 4 (often) and level 6 or 7 (depending). These are symbolized by new unit graphics. This was mirrored by the research costs - Tier one costing the same, tier two costing the same and so on.
This game design decision was challenged quickly by many players - and rightfully so. Players (and I include myself here) simply prefer a gradual increase of HP, combat stats and features. It's more rewarding and it’s more fun, thus leading us to slowly soften up the old tiers until we essentially abandoned them more or less completely, all the while retaining the old "stepped" research price system. When last week’s update hit, this was essentially the nail in the coffin for said system. It just didn't work any longer, and I gladly abandoned it for a more logical and intuitive linear increasing system. Most combat units over the progression of all levels of research more or less double their combat value, incorporating offensive and defensive stats, hit points and features. Researches in turn now slowly increase in price to about 150% of their starting values, making it worthwhile to invest while still serving as a “sink” for later game resource abundance. In turn the later researches require much more time, a luxury we can now afford because we are providing three instead of two slots.
Finally I would like to show you how the new system is NOT more expensive or unfair than the old one. Let’s for example compare the Rare Resource prices for Motorized Infantry old/new: A week ago you were paying a total of 11.263 Rares while researching said unit from level 1 to level 7. Today you are paying a total of 11.925 Rares for the same levels of research. The difference is a measly 663 Rare Resources, distributed over 7 levels and 26 days. Reason for this difference simply lies in the fact that we now use an intuitive +10% cost system. So if you still feel that a level increase of 94 Rare Resources comprises an unbearable and inaffordable price hike, then unfortunately I am afraid all my long explanation and justification will not convince you otherwise. For all other players I hope you follow my lead and enjoy the game as it should be – fun to play, trying to balance out pay and free economy while ever improving and evolving.
Yours sincerely,
Germanico
Creative Director
Dorado Games
"Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf
), the company needs to generate enough benefits (aka after taxes. I assume that as the payment funnel goes through Bytro, you pay the 19-23% german VAT) through us to pay for those two.
