PDA

View Full Version : I'm goin broke, man!



Flame
November 19th, 2012, 23:28
"You are going to donate 8580 gold coins to the Goddess of Life."


And all I got from my quest was:
You found treasure! The bounty contains 2020 gold coins and 2 items (http://www.guildmasters.com/Game/Character.aspx). You earned ****XP during the fight.




And I didn't even die. I only lost 800 vitality. I know others are having the same problem. Healing is so expensive and we don't make up the cost at all. I have to drop down and do quests with really low xp to make up the gold. Is there any way we can balance this better?

Zab
November 19th, 2012, 23:57
Scouts in a party have to seldom heal. Maybe you should join one.... ;)

Flame
November 20th, 2012, 00:20
Smartie. :P

In a party I hog xp AND gold and it's frustrating and I feel bad.
But if I'm having this problem I know others (warriors and priests) are too. Heal costs are still way too high.

Zab
November 20th, 2012, 00:34
I think they are fair, but perhaps they could up the price you can sell things back to the Blacksmith. If you choose to play high stakes, you gotta pay <3 :)

Camille
November 20th, 2012, 07:16
It's not really about playing high stakes. We have to forcibly play low end quests in order to not go bankrupt and at the same time, the devs want us to do the higher end ones and not repeat the same ones over and over so the xp lowers and lowers and lowers. It's impossible to do the other quests when you can't cover the costs. It is terribly imbalanced. And Zab, you are right, scout rarely have to worry about healing costs in a party because the priests and fighters are going bankrupt for them.

Alex
November 20th, 2012, 07:46
We are watching how some of the top players are able to get both, tons of XP and gold every day: they alternate what quests they complete: higher quests to get XP and lower gets to get gold.

We like very much the balance of quests. It's as real as life itself. Harder quests will be expensive but you will learn form them. Non risky and mechanical quests won't teach you too much, but they will be profitable in gold.

Logs from top players demonstrte they are able to got both when they alternate quests. In fact, there is too much gold in the world and maybe we will make some adjustments to reduce the amount of gold in the game (with the same reduction on the helaing costs for not ot make it more expensive).

Kind scouts and wizards should share their gold with the melee companions :+)

Kurilia
November 20th, 2012, 08:16
When the priests we can launch our skills for the entire party, we may have to do it for a price. Now there are many players in the partys offering gold to the priests who suffer all hits. Good companions! :$

Lukasz Kanarek
November 20th, 2012, 10:15
@Alex
Just give us more things to buy for gold, more interesting items etc.
If I need a gold, I'm doing highest quest on easy.

@topic
There was a time when i also had a problem with gold, but from the time that -damage reduction- working, and i bought some items with -all dmg, everything is mutch easier and i'm not spending us mutch gold on healing.

Also ultimate answer is: wait for active skills :P

Rson
November 20th, 2012, 11:59
Temple healing is too expensive whether your doing solo quest or a full party quest, especially for fighters and priests since they spend most of their gold healing. The no experience when killed thing didn't help either. It just alienated a lot of players into going solo. The new exp distribution is a step in the right direction at least the party member gets exp for their trouble. The temple healing cost would be reasonable if skills are available but unfortunately it isn't and not everyone is willing to give gold to the meat shield for healing or even if they do it still cost more to heal. I was in a very active party we traded items when we got something good that someone else can use but when it came to gold it was very different. Someone had to remind the party about donating gold for healing. It felt like I am begging and I don't like begging my party members for gold it feels embarrassing. Rather than beg I went solo.

Flame
November 20th, 2012, 12:30
It's really bad. I went solo because I felt like I was hogging xp and gold from my melee friends who needed it and then I was still sending gold to Camille when she was having a hard time. I was having an easier time making it on the lower quests. But, then with xp degredation I started doing higher quests to get more xp then I was having to heal more and losing all that gold I made on the lower quests. So basically, we're discouraged from doing lower quests by xp degredation, we're discouraged from doing higher quests by the expensive heal costs. So what exactly what are we supposed to be doing?

Camille
November 20th, 2012, 12:39
We are watching how some of the top players are able to get both, tons of XP and gold every day: they alternate what quests they complete: higher quests to get XP and lower gets to get gold.

I am one of these top players doing that and it is not enjoyable. I always feel like I'm barely keeping my head above water. The quests are unpredictable. We can win one fairly often and then get wiped out for no reason. That happened a couple times when I had my squad filled and a 20k heal a couple times. I'd like to buy stuff for my Followers to help them but I just don't have the gold.

Not quite sure what you man by "learn from the higher quests." The only thing I learn is that I have a ton of potential and no resources to play with it.

Flame
November 20th, 2012, 12:51
I am one of these top players doing that and it is not enjoyable. I always feel like I'm barely keeping my head above water. The quests are unpredictable. We can win one fairly often and then get wiped out for no reason. That happened a couple times when I had my squad filled and a 20k heal a couple times. I'd like to buy stuff for my Followers to help them but I just don't have the gold.

Not quite sure what you man by "learn from the higher quests." The only thing I learn is that I have a ton of potential and no resources to play with it.


Yah, I have been trying to save, save, save my gold because I want to be able to help my followers when they need it and the way I'm losing gold on these quests, I just can't save.

Kain
November 20th, 2012, 13:01
I´m not a top player, just Level 22, but I find the game fairly balanced. I expect it to be hard, not a picnic walk. I´m a warrior and also suffer from gold saving, but I like it this way... although I agree that sometimes it is frustrating...

One solution will be a different distribution for the gold in a party. More gold for first line players and less gold for second line ones. It is ONLY a suggestion....

Kurilia
November 20th, 2012, 14:49
One solution will be a different distribution for the gold in a party. More gold for first line players and less gold for second line ones. It is ONLY a suggestion....
I like this! :$

Isildur
November 20th, 2012, 15:00
In my case it's a matter of finding where your limits are. Followers come and leave, party members the same, so the real potential is most of the time variable, even when soloing (due to followers). So I just do quests and take note of how they resulted depending on the total size of the "party", so I find which quests are more suitable for earning high XP. And also take note of those easy ones where i can get good loot and gold.

Also I like the fact that quests are so unpredicable... when you play them with "auto pilot", that is, you launch the quest and go away, getting back only to see the results. When I play certain quests and I'm online to choose the targets, the success rate is way higher; and I suspect it will be even higher when I'm able to use spells.

Zab
November 20th, 2012, 15:07
Speaking of limits...maybe when you die, it's a hint. Pack it in for awhile and let yourself naturally heal. :)

Kain
November 20th, 2012, 18:18
Also I like the fact that quests are so unpredicable... when you play them with "auto pilot", that is, you launch the quest and go away, getting back only to see the results. When I play certain quests and I'm online to choose the targets, the success rate is way higher; and I suspect it will be even higher when I'm able to use spells.I agree. That makes the game more interesting.

carlosmt
November 20th, 2012, 19:53
When the Priests could heal for themselves... WE could save gold. :D

Camille
November 21st, 2012, 07:41
Also I like the fact that quests are so unpredicable... when you play them with "auto pilot", that is, you launch the quest and go away, getting back only to see the results. When I play certain quests and I'm online to choose the targets, the success rate is way higher; and I suspect it will be even higher when I'm able to use spells.

I guess I'm just not the sort of person who likes dice games. I don't gamble. I like smart things. I like being able to make a smart calculation that takes thought. I prefer thinking about things and winning against my opponents with brainpower and not a brainless roll of the dice. Agnus Belli left the game because of this feature. There is no glory in randomness.

Kain
November 21st, 2012, 12:30
I guess I'm just not the sort of person who likes dice games. I don't gamble. I like smart things. I like being able to make a smart calculation that takes thought. I prefer thinking about things and winning against my opponents with brainpower and not a brainless roll of the dice. Agnus Belli left the game because of this feature. There is no glory in randomness.
PLEASE DONT GET ME WRONG, I don´t want to start an argument. I have been playing RPG for more than 20 years, in computers and also desktop games, and I can not believe any RPG style game without the influence of the luck, or the dice, or the random chances.

Going further, in real life, great battle plans have been wiped off due to unpredicted circumstances. Random events can block the best of your thinking, both in real life and in this game. I agree with you about the smart thinking, I also like it, but when playing a game... well, I want it to have something that´s not under my absolute control. If not, I just choose chess or the rubik cube.

Alex
November 21st, 2012, 12:30
I guess I'm just not the sort of person who likes dice games. I don't gamble. I like smart things. I like being able to make a smart calculation that takes thought. I prefer thinking about things and winning against my opponents with brainpower and not a brainless roll of the dice. Agnus Belli left the game because of this feature. There is no glory in randomness.

I can tell you with first-hand knowledge that randomness is not the key of winning battles in this game. Also it is not fully determinist. Determinism is really bored and this is a RPG game, inspired on classic pen-and-paper RPG games, where you must use your brain, teamwork and a pack of dices. I cannot reveal details but I can say that it is as real as life itself; when you face an oponent with your same stats, there is about 50% chance of winning. When you face lower opponents, you have a very high chance of winning but the lower opponent may have sometimes a stroke of luck and chain some critical hits, as in real life itself.

I have a deep knowledge of Mathematics and I can assure that the command of statiscal laws demands more brainpower that a bored and simple determinism. You must forget about older non-rpg games you played and open your mind and your perspective. When you play poker you can not be sure about if you will win a hand, but you can handle probabilities. Managing well what you win or lose on every single hand, the most important thing is how much money you had when you start a game of poker, and how much you have when you ends, and -almost invariably- the player with more brainpower commanding the statistics, will be the winner, no matter the randomness coming in play in the game. In RPGs it is the same thing.

carlosmt
November 21st, 2012, 15:52
Yes I like so. If I haven't a small possibility of winning a hard opponent... what David would think against Goliat?

Camille
November 21st, 2012, 17:06
You must forget about older non-rpg games you played and open your mind and your perspective. When you play poker you can not be sure about if you will win a hand, but you can handle probabilities. Managing well what you win or lose on every single hand, the most important thing is how much money you had when you start a game of poker, and how much you have when you ends, and -almost invariably- the player with more brainpower commanding the statistics, will be the winner, no matter the randomness coming in play in the game. In RPGs it is the same thing.

In the RPG that I enjoyed, . . . and I am NOT looking for you to recreate Knighthood (lord knows it had its problems!), it was about amassing power with mathematics and using it against people who sometimes didn't know the equations. Sometimes they did and we could pull a surprise with a feature called 'churching' (one hit double value). But it had to be calculated when to use it. We could beat them down and see the healing charges lessen. We knew they were wearing down. We just had to make a good guess as to when they were down enough to take the double hit which would put our attack numbers over their defense numbers. Several things could happen. 1. We make a bad estimate and don't get the prize. 2. We calculate well and the prize is ours. 3. They come on line or toy with us and heal at the last minute and we lose the prize and quite possibly, the Church effect, and worse! a vassal if they filled their trapper. There was no chance. Only bad guesses. With poker, you use body language. Some people are more or less gifted. It's not about chance either. My mind is way too open for the average person. That's why I get so frustrated. Maybe using the brain will come with skills. For now, it's just clicking. I do enjoy the teamwork though. But losing quests I normally win easily and having a 20k heal because the servers wouldn't load my attack page is a crap "lesson."

Alex
November 21st, 2012, 18:47
Just a note... Knighthood was not a Role-Playing Game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game), and it was not any similitude with role-playing games beyond the fact of being a game. Calling it a RPG is a huge mistake.

As I said, you have to open your mind if you are willing to enjoy a new game. But be sure that this is and this will be a new game. Meanwhile you will only get to be frustrated for not getting the game you miss.

Alex
November 21st, 2012, 19:35
Anyway, thank you for sharing your thoughts. We greatly appreciate the help of all active community in this forum.

Of course, I am always talking about the full game that we designed, and not only of only a part shown on this demo.

Camille
November 22nd, 2012, 04:50
Just a note... Knighthood was not a Role-Playing Game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game), and it was not any similitude with role-playing games beyond the fact of being a game. Calling it a RPG is a huge mistake.

As I said, you have to open your mind if you are willing to enjoy a new game. But be sure that this is and this will be a new game. Meanwhile you will only get to be frustrated for not getting the game you miss.

You don't know anything about me, Alex. I have played many many FB games and thus far there is absolutely nothing new in this game. I'm curious to see how it evolves so I'm waiting. But I can say that I've already played this game but better. I'm here to help your beta testing. I'm not here to get back a game I DO NOT MISS AT ALL. TBH, I'm glad it's gone. Every time we give you feedback you don't want to hear, you judge us or just "wait and see". Well, if you already have a plan stop asking our opinion. If you want our thoughts on the full game, well bring it on. For now, I feel strung along. Maybe you brought it out too early.

Did you play Knighthood? It was an MMORPG. But an RPG nonetheless. I know what an RPG is.

Fran
November 22nd, 2012, 05:56
As usual, we thank you your comments and suggestions.

We are classic RPG lovers, and we wanted to present Guildmasters as a RPG: choice of character class (profession), experience points and level up, skills development, adventure parties of players, quests completion and fight monsters, equipment and inventory... where the key is the strategy developing the character, not only the tatic in a single combat.

To this RPG facet, we have merge the social aspect of a Facebook game: guilds, alliances, followers/masters, squads... as well as features of a MMO game (massively multiplayer online) so we define Guild Masters as "the first social MMORPG on Facebook": We think that being the first MMORPG on the facebook platform is something NEW. .There some more games calling themselves RPG as Mafia Wars, Castle of Age, and all their cloned games but they are really far to being RPG games, from our understandings as classic RPG players. And the mentioned Kinghthood was a social MMO-Wargame (strategy game), not a MMORPG.

We work hard to be different and original from the current social market so we must apply the right dosage of RPG (levels) and Social (power) to get a balanced mixture.

We want not be just like other games, because the game markets is very wide (social games on Facebook, and MMORPG out of Facebook).

What we pretend, since our point of view, is to create something new mixing the best of both worlds. Of course we will hear, and want to hear all thoughts, and we will consider all suggestions, though we cannot tie to one only thought and must hear everybody and to be loyal to our idea.

Camille
November 22nd, 2012, 06:29
As usual, we thank you your comments and suggestions.

We are classic RPG lovers, and we wanted to present Guildmasters as a RPG: choice of character class (profession), experience points and level up, skills development, adventure parties of players, quests completion and fight monsters, equipment and inventory... where the key is the strategy developing the character, not only the tatic in a single combat.

This is great. But it already exists. It's called Shakes and Fidget. I quit it so long ago out of boredom that I don't know if they do this monster questing.


To this RPG facet, we have merge the social aspect of a Facebook game: guilds, alliances, followers/masters, squads... as well as features of a MMO game (massively multiplayer online) so we define Guild Masters as "the first social MMORPG on Facebook": We think that being the first MMORPG on the facebook platform is something NEW. .

Sort of . . . Battlestations is like this minus the "Followers"


There some more games calling themselves RPG as Mafia Wars, Castle of Age, and all their cloned games but they are really far to being RPG games, from our understandings as classic RPG players.

These are crap BUT you need to think about the psychology in them and why they work. People don't game so they can relive some more "real life." Gaming is an escape. Unless you've got some masochistic tendancies, most people play for the reward in the escape. I play because they relax me. They take me away from housework, traffic in Paris, and banging my head against a wall when my students don't take responsibility for their work. The last thing I want in a game is to lose something through no fault of my own. I lost 10s of thousands in gold yesterday NOT because I chose a quest too high but because the game wouldn't load. I win these quests easily but the roll of your dice decided otherwise.


And the mentioned Kinghthood was a social MMO-Wargame (strategy game), not a MMORPG.

I'm not convinced but it doesn't matter. I'm grateful that there is no chance of resurrecting it.


We work hard to be different and original from the current social market so we must apply the right dosage of RPG (levels) and Social (power) to get a balanced mixture.

I really don't understand why it is such a struggle as there are dozens of games using these formulas very efficiently.


We want not be just like other games, because the game markets is very wide (social games on Facebook, and MMORPG out of Facebook).

And we are all looking forward to something new but when express our "bad" experiences in the game (like Followers ranking out of us or insane gold costs) you assume it's because we are referencing it to ANOTHER game. It's not. It is genuinely not a positive experience. Do not judge our motives. You do not know them.


we cannot tie to one only thought and must hear everybody and to be loyal to our idea.

No one has ever said otherwise. However, on a side note, I created a FB page so my Followers and I can exchange material easily, ask questions, and do basic game organization without pasting on 16 walls. A thread was started yesterday by someone who said he'll no longer come on the Forum because the devs shoot down all our observations. I wouldn't go so far to say you shoot down ALL of them. But you do communicate a closed door and are quite defensive. We have no idea what you are considering. Your judgements like me wanting an old game back (ridiculous) or that I'm a negative influence on the others and not "cheerful" enough DO NOT inspire people to come forward in order to be treated the same way. I speak plainly. It's direct and to the point. I never pretended to be the only one who should be heard. Never. Your last poll was very well done. There are some fabulous ideas being thrown around in my FB page. It's a shame they're not being heard.

Camille
November 22nd, 2012, 06:54
Oh! and just for the record, I have never discussed my ideas or opinions of the game with my Followers. Everything I have to say is said here.

Alex
November 22nd, 2012, 09:37
As usual, we thank you your comments and suggestions.

We are classic RPG lovers, and we wanted to present Guildmasters as a RPG: choice of character class (profession), experience points and level up, skills development, adventure parties of players, quests completion and fight monsters, equipment and inventory... where the key is the strategy developing the character, not only the tatic in a single combat.

To this RPG facet, we have merge the social aspect of a Facebook game: guilds, alliances, followers/masters, squads... as well as features of a MMO game (massively multiplayer online) so we define Guild Masters as "the first social MMORPG on Facebook": We think that being the first MMORPG on the facebook platform is something NEW. .There some more games calling themselves RPG as Mafia Wars, Castle of Age, and all their cloned games but they are really far to being RPG games, from our understandings as classic RPG players. And the mentioned Kinghthood was a social MMO-Wargame (strategy game), not a MMORPG.

We work hard to be different and original from the current social market so we must apply the right dosage of RPG (levels) and Social (power) to get a balanced mixture.

We want not be just like other games, because the game markets is very wide (social games on Facebook, and MMORPG out of Facebook).

What we pretend, since our point of view, is to create something new mixing the best of both worlds. Of course we will hear, and want to hear all thoughts, and we will consider all suggestions, though we cannot tie to one only thought and must hear everybody and to be loyal to our idea.

Welcome to the forums, Fran. You are right, as you said, there are a lot of RPGs on internet, and there are a lot of social games on Facebook, but there is not any social RPG on Facebook!

Flame
November 22nd, 2012, 13:59
You guys are very close-minded if you think this is the only social RPG on FB. Get a clue.

Jin
November 22nd, 2012, 19:54
Currently in our party, we are giving money and items to offset the high healing costs for the tanks and cleric. Problem solved.

Orik
November 22nd, 2012, 20:24
Currently in our party, we are giving money and items to offset the high healing costs for the tanks and cleric. Problem solved.
Well said +1

Alfgut
November 23rd, 2012, 09:30
You guys are very close-minded if you think this is the only social RPG on FB. Get a clue.Flame, I didn?t understand your post until I read backward and saw what you guys understand about what is a RPG :D:D:D:D:D:D:D Now all is clear ;)However I must be very close-minded because I though it was a different thing :O

Guild Masters
November 23rd, 2012, 09:41
The point of the topic of this post has been missed long ago, and tones are getting unpleasant.

Everybody may express their thoughts and, no matter if they are right or wrong, tolerance must be the first rule on a forum.

Reached this point, we'd better let it be, and stop it now, as it's quite clear this won't get anywhere.

Thread is closed to avoid bigger disrespects and useless personal quarrels.