Announcement

Collapse

New Forums are now up!

Greetings Dragon Lords! Please visit our new forums at http://forums.wardragons.com! We're leaving this old forum up for a period of time to allow players to migrate over any important posts, but will eventually close them out. Please note that you will need to log in using your PocketID over on the new forum. You can also access them through the game by tapping on Settings > Forums!
See more
See less

A Warning to Players without the Beta

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A Warning to Players without the Beta

    GET OUT WHILE YOU CAN. You all can't see the beta in the game or the forums but it literally has NOTHING to do with the current game. Do you enjoy flying your dragons? Well, that's gone. Like building up your base to make it stronger? Meaningless. Do you want your team to improve and work together? Nope, it only matters how many other teams you can throw together as giant alliances to get shit done. Your individual merit as a team means nothing now.

    The game was called War Dragons and there is ZERO war in any form. It is so stagnant, time-consuming, costly and boring with no wars or any meaningful combat. Now to the dragons part, well...that's a damn joke. You almost never fly your dragon...BUT you can be a banker, a shipbuilder or a bunch of other everyday jobs that some of you probably have and play dragons on the side for fun.

    So, seriously, before you start to like War Dragons, just imagine it is dead and move on. This new beta is all about mass alliances that completely rob teams of what makes them unique individually and there is no dragons. So, welcome to Alliance Boats, uninstall the game and gtfo while you still can. People have spent weeks trying to get PG to improve it and it has all fallen on deaf ears. If you are lucky enough, admin like CampusLifer will basically tell you that you are wrong and you are enjoying it basically, you just didn't know it because people must love the idea of no dragons, no wars but a bunch of meaningless tasks and the one part of the game people love has been stripped out of it. Good luck to you guys if they release this POS game wide.
    Last edited by Panda; 05-31-2017, 04:55 PM.

  • #2
    SimBoats?
    [ITIL isn't my IGN]
    XP Calculator, Days to Level, XP Lookup, Evo Stone Level Lookup

    Comment


    • #3
      🤣😂🤣 on a side note:

      play at the world map for yourself before you make a decision based on this post. 👍🏽

      Comment


      • #4
        Totally. Some people might enjoy all of that actually.

        Comment


        • #5
          You forgot about the complete lack of information on how you are supposed to do all that wonderful clerical work. Still have no clue myself on what I'm supposed to do.

          Comment


          • #6
            I 100% agree with Panda. The world map is terrible, useless and boring. No one should ever play it, ever.

            Comment


            • #7
              Coming from someone that is no longer in beta, I can honestly say, it sucks and I don't care to go back to it except for having the invader xp base.

              The rest of it, blows big time. BORRRRRRINGGGGGG
              x7DeadlyGoobsx

              Comment


              • #8
                There was a reason I rejected beta for our team and it and it was 100% in line with what panda is putting forward.

                If anything PG have held onto me this long by not releasing it globally because then I'm out.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by CampusLifer
                  AncientsAscent saw the huge black blob on the map. Clearly it's a threat. What was stopping AncientsAscent from doing the same thing --- forming an alliance and being the leader of a mass of littler teams? How are they at a disadvantage when they have all the ability to do the same thing the group of black teams did (but probably better, because their alliance of smaller teams is helmed by a super high-level team with powerful dragons & bases)?

                  It's fine to say "they didn't form an alliance because they don't feel like it, don't want to make time and/or dont like the feature enough to bother" --- but that's not the same as saying the worldmap put their team at a disadvantage. The team in question just chose not to do the thing which would make them more competitive in the feature. Every single thing the a team in the black alliance decided to do, AncentsAscent had the ability to do the same thing. It's like saying "my team didn't do many attacks in the weekly event, because we like wars better and we don't like spending my time on that... but I think I should have won anyway ---- i'm at a disadvantage."

                  So CampusLifer posted this about how the new beta should work as her shining example of why it makes sense...except let's look at the game:

                  AA does more/better weekly attacks in events, wars better and probably spends more time and that is WHY they win in diamond the way none of the black blob teams have. So...looking at this in the core game? Basically they don't do the weekly event, don't war better, don't spend the time AND they are handed a win, because they had more ships...you have to laugh, or you will cry.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by CampusLifer
                    Somehow the black-alliance managed to organize their set of teams enough to knock AncientsAscent out of their continents. So I don't think it's fair to say that it's impossible to organize a group of players beyond 50 members; they did it.

                    I don't think it's fair to say the teams in the black-alliance like Moxxie, Siege, PeaceNLove don't do daily wars, events, or spend money. My understanding is that they pick one person and tell them they're the person in charge of map activities and he sends simple orders for the other players. The other players can execute orders in a relatively few taps and a couple of battles -- not a huge time commitment.

                    What's stopping AncientsAscent from the doing the same thing? Why can't they pick one player from their team to contact all the other teams asking them to join an alliance, and giving them orders of what to do?


                    Here's the original statement:

                    > Evey single element of this is geared towards baby teams and players. Everything you do is designed to cripple and hamper your top teams and players.
                    > Wouldn't it just be easier if Pocket Gems came out and told us all that you just don't want us in the game anymore?
                    > Surely that would be easier for you than this fiasco?

                    What part of worldmap is "crippling and hampering top teams and players"? AncientsAscent has the ability to do every single thing the members of Moxxie do. They're just choosing not to.

                    For sure the R&D team wants the top diamond teams to continue playing, and continue playing the world map. We were pretty clear the goals of the worldmap includes inter-team diplomacy. I would have expected by now that top diamond would have formed their own super-alliance. I'm not sure why they haven't. Given that they haven't, I'm not sure why they're surprised that they're under threat.


                    So this is what we are stuck working with... PG wants us to give up War Dragons and play Inter-team diplomacy boats. Notice how in all of this bullshit there is basically not one mention of wars or dragons lol.

                    They want to turn the game into stagnant negotiations that nobody wants to spend their time doing...and they clearly want to kill off pretty much all aspects of the game. The very basic idea that the top teams are competitive and don't want to spend all their time making fucking super alliances and would rather spend their time improving their team is COMPLETELY lost.

                    Also, reading comprehension clearly isn't big because I didn't say the teams mentioned don't do anything. I simply said none of them do it at the level of AA and yet, by just having a bunch of them over and over and over, that is what is passing for strategy.

                    And the whole "Well they did it attitude", then why can't they do it in the core game? Because in the current game, getting your team to diamond, creating stability and having them excel is much harder than simply making more boats. The idea that building more boats and just repeatedly attacking over and over is somehow amazing co-ordination is just retarded.

                    This is the future that PG has in mind for you all...also, clearly their staff is top-notch as well.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Not in beta but it looks to me like PG are trying to turn War Dragons into a dragon based Civilisation V (inter-team diplomacy, alliance, boats) - not sure that I'm very keen on that, but can't really comment much.

                      Comment


                      • ITIL
                        ITIL commented
                        Editing a comment
                        would be a shame if boats really did turn into the core game with no more fancy 3D dragons

                      • Goober
                        Goober commented
                        Editing a comment
                        Your comment was enough because you are 100% right

                    • #12
                      It's hard to put this in context because we are only seeing parts of the discussion which Panda is sharing.
                      But it reads to me as though someone is butthurt because they are being beaten by lesser teams!

                      I do agree that strong teams should come out on top and that PG has been pandering to the little players for quite some time.

                      No idea what's going on in the beta, but I can say when it was mentioned by our officers to our team, many of them liked the idea of the boats and wanted us to do well enough to be ranked high enough to get into the beta so they could play that part of the game.

                      I guess 'unseen' it's all about the promotional skills of the people telling the story.

                      Comment


                      • YellowMonkey
                        YellowMonkey commented
                        Editing a comment
                        You are correct. Btw they aren't being beat by "lesser teams" per say.

                        AA was thrown out of their territory, yes.

                        Dread got scared, yes.

                        Dread threatened different teams and members and emailed them telling them they would farm their teams over and over if they did not fall back in world Map...yes.

                        In summary(context Panda has purposely omitted):

                        1) Teams in this so called "black-alliance" consists of many MANY sapphire and diamond teams. (By far not majorly "lesser" teams as Panda is trying to claim. Obviously no matter if you are the #1 ranking team in game, if(just throwing odd numbers here) 10 teams cooperate while you sit on the sidelines and have too big of an ego to ally with others...obviously it's going to be alittle tougher for your 1 team to take on 10 teams.

                        2) DID AA have the same opportunity to make or join an alliance? Yes. Did they? Obviously not good enough.

                        3) Does dread have the same opportunity to make or join an alliance? Yes(well maybe not as their main stance as far as I remember is bully all- so I don't see many teams willing to help them 🤣) BUT they have just as much opportunity to do so. Have they? No....egos get in the way maybe? 🤣
                        Last edited by YellowMonkey; 06-01-2017, 12:54 AM.

                      • Panda
                        Panda commented
                        Editing a comment
                        This just goes back to what I was saying originally and arguing with CL about. The concept of teams vs alliances. I believe that teams should be good. Instead of taking 10 mediocre teams and just through sheer number getting a result is hardly strategic.

                        Please continue to tell us how we felt about things, and about the ranking of teams considering you were on the #2 team and I doubt they would have you back (since we are just throwing out speculation here)

                        It is the general argument of quality over quantity that leads back to the core game and the removal of almost all aspects

                        Your team is incapable of being competitive in the current game, yes.
                        You have no real interest in building a quality team but instead want to just rotate people in who you have not really vested interest in, yes

                        So the idea of simply rounding up enough people clearly appeals to you. Everyone has things they prefer. As I stated, mine is the quality of a team, not just mass numbers in some "alliance" of teams that aren't competitive except for they just have more people and more boats. To each his own.

                        We clearly value different things but I think the general sentiment here speaks for itself. This argument aside...nobody wants to play a game that went from war dragons to, Alliance boats with a heavy dose of office tasks mixed it. While you may like it, feel free to read the rest of the posts.
                        Last edited by Panda; 06-01-2017, 01:22 AM.

                    • #13
                      All I can say is:

                      If i would like beta besides the xp base I'd definitely play another game which offers all those ideas on a mature level.

                      For me WD should stay what it is. Flying dragons, building bases and improving the individual team by improving the members in flying and base building skills.

                      I just don't have time to play this ridiculous boring boat sailing bs...

                      Comment


                      • #14
                        Im not in BETA but I do remember the great alpha-boat Event from Long ago... I guess not so much has changed?!

                        Just my 2 Cents:
                        - Ive seen multiple other apps where forging super alliances of super strong teams made the game die... for a long time other alliances formed to face them with the outcome that more ressources (spending money) crashed them all. The result was that they ruled a world no one else was playing anymore...
                        - If I want to play boats I search the app store for "battle ship" or something like that. If I want to play dragons I search the app store for "Dragons". Simple as that. I DO NOT want to play boats.

                        Comment


                        • YellowMonkey
                          YellowMonkey commented
                          Editing a comment
                          Actually there is MASSIVE changes since then.

                      • #15
                        I guess the other question is.... can we still play War Dragons as it currently stands once the beta is released gamewide?
                        Will it really effect the 'main' game if we ignore that whole section of it?

                        Comment


                        • gaza8143
                          gaza8143 commented
                          Editing a comment
                          If Spooky says the current iteration has issues I am worried as he has to be the most level headed person on these forums.

                        • Hieronymus
                          Hieronymus commented
                          Editing a comment
                          I think the operative phrase there is 'current iteration'. They'd be crazy to slap a 'finished' label on the current beta and call it a game. No one would play it.
                          Fortunately, its currently so dissociated from the main game that we'd all just keep on merrily burning stuff with our dragons like ships never happened.

                          They've communicated a bit of their vision in very general terms to us, and I for one am intrigued, and look forward to see if this ends up being a train wreck, or I end up more addicted than I currently am to this game.
                          It is a work in progress though, very rough so far. Much potential though. We just have to stick along for the ride, bumpy though it's been up to this point.

                          They have been remarkably responsive (compared to other betas I've 'participated' in) so far, and seem genuinely interested in our input and feedback. At times it feels like we are partners in the development of this game expansion. Which is both really cool, and scary. :-)
                          If you want to try it for yourself, find a team with the beta and join!

                        • YellowMonkey
                          YellowMonkey commented
                          Editing a comment
                          Goober I can assure you I am not the only person that doesn't "hate" the world map beta.

                          However, I invite you to read Hieronymus post here. This is a well said and rational response.

                          What some continue to overlook is the fact that we are participating is a very "rough" NOT finished beta feature.

                          What many, like Panda, are purposely omitting is letting the community know that PG ARE infact listening, communicating and trying to appeal to beta testers requests.

                          There have been multiple changes made to the beta since the start. There have been MANY player suggested changes made or added to world map. We are not just testing something and saying yes we like it or no we don't. We have been given oppurtunity to make DETAILED suggestions of what we want and how we want things to work.

                          No, PG hasn't implemented EVERY suggestion, if they did then more than one suggestion would overlap and not work. For example, panda wants a 1/10 ship loss ratio when level 300-400 attack a level 50. Others say that would make high levels just trample the entire map leaving nothing for low levels and newer players. PG, Decided to budge just a little and will be trying a 1/3 shiploss ratio(compared to what it is now 1/2). Now if pg first said ok, let's try the 1/10. Then what? High levels will completely destroy 10x as many lower levels and there would be a vast amount of the world map back to square 1.

                          My point is, this is a beta that we are not just participating in. We actually are being allowed to help create the final result of it.
                          Last edited by YellowMonkey; 06-02-2017, 04:00 PM.
                      Working...
                      X