Notice: Balancing Update Scheduled for April 11, 2017

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Notice: Balancing Update Scheduled for April 11, 2017

      Greetings, Kings & Queens,

      a change is gonna come. It will affect the way you build your nations and fight your wars. Prepare for the following improvements which will be released on April 11, 2017:

      Changes to build times and combat speed:
      - Build times of ALL combat units will be lowered by 33%.
      - Time between combat ticks will be lowered by 50% (30min instead of 60min).
      - Administrator movement speed is increased by 50%.

      These changes will speed up your combat considerably throughout the game. This will be paired with a number of changes to the resource balancing to help you keep pace:

      Changes to player countries (= possible player starting countries):
      - increased money production and starting money of player countries by 140%
      - increased manpower production and starting manpower of player countries by 80%
      - increased luxury goods production and starting luxury goods of player countries by 50%
      - increased production of all other resources and amount of all other starting resources of player countries by 20%

      Changes to AI countries (= small AI-only starting countries):
      - increased money production and starting money of AI countries by 20%
      - decreased manpower production and starting manpower of AI countries by 10%
      - decreased luxury goods production and starting luxury goods of AI countries by 25%
      - decreased production of all other resources and amount of all other starting resources of AI countries by 40%

      Changes to colonizable countries (= provinces in the Terra Incognita):
      - increased money production and starting money of colonizable countries by 60%
      - increased manpower production and starting manpower of colonizable countries by 35%
      - luxury goods production and starting luxury goods of colonizable countries remain at current value
      - decreased production of all other resources and amount of all other starting resources of colonizable countries by 20%

      These changes will boost your overall economy while providing incentives to attack player countries (or establish colonies) instead of attacking AI countries. A significant boost in starting money and money production will help you trade for the resources you need most. These changes will be ready for beta testing in Frontline Pioneer rounds today. They will be released to live games on April 11, 2017 and will affect ALL games - existing and newly created ones alike.

      Please feel free to test the changes in Frontline Pioneer games and provide us with feedback on the forum.

      Your New World Empires team
      Felix / Alkyonor
      Community Manager
      Bytro Labs GmbH
    • I will make the same argument as always.
      Every major change has pushed the game towards WAR, and away from Economy and discovery. You are getting farther and farther from its original design, thus retaining fewer and fewer. Obviously you couldn't figure out how to monetize discovery and economic features.

      Sorry didn't mean to like myself lol.

      OK so battle is still the main driver for monetizing the game, let me give you some good non combat ideas
      2nd lvl 5 monument 5,000 ducat licensing fee also costs to produce and time are 50% less. Same lic fee for 3rd -5th.
      Since we are making admins 50% faster how about doubling the risk for not at least spending the silver to bring it to non-core status
      maybe a 15% risk every 24 hours its not upgraded.
      Lets double the effect of a level 3 Trade house but require it to have a level 2 harbor or level 2 infrastructure to be built.
      Second we need a Colonial Regional capital that can be built to provide additional colonists but not Admins or Explorers. Throw 5k ducat fee on this too.

      The third thing I would like to see is Fortresses provide some % range of misinformation such as level 2 Fortress will only show true number of units no composition unless an actual spy is purchased. Level 3 could be +- 50% in accuracy of number of units. Super fortress level 10 city no knowledge of garrison of course 5K ducat licensing fee. If you want to monetize the game and still attract explorers and builders try this to find if you get people of all 3 minds to participate that way. The other thing is again you need to give a minimum of 1 resource producing province in each playable city.

      Also lets let the navy be viable, only citizens can cross oceans with out an actual ship all military require to board a ship. This will give the colonies a fighting chance of developing before somebody sends an army of 10 regulars to just hunt for colonies.

      I still stand by my first opinion the people that really loved the idea of exploration and economic development have no strategy that they can spend some ducats to offset the militarist who drops 30,000 ducats to build 12 ships in 5 minutes.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by slomoney ().

    • Sad to see this change. I think it will make the game almost unworkable for anyone other than a warrior.

      As said above by slomoney, this moves the game completely away from doing any research other than the military capacity and capabilities. Defence of the 'homeland' will mean that troops need to be stationed in key provinces rather than expanding the state and conquering a larger resource base. Colonising will become almost impossible as use of resources for military purposes will always take precedence over creating and sending out colonists to form a colony that will need to be defended. Recent AI changes have increased the likelihood of non-core provinces defecting and of uprisings in colonies, forcing ever more resources to be required by the war machine.

      This has already become a difficult to play in a slow, strategic development manner and these changes will ruin any chance of such a method of play being successful in future.

      I shall finish my current round (mainly due to the amount of real money I have spent to date) and then, sadly, delete this game from my computer tabs. ;(
    • Economic rise walked hand in hand with exploration and the necessity of war activities to secure, protect and, at times, dispute ownership of colonies and territories.
      The time period covered here attempts to combine all aspects of this and warfare was one of the key components in promoting the continued exploration and exploitation activities. Adding colonies and territories to a countries bank book and taking away from another kept major players involved, while reducing the influence of others.
      We also need to respond to the actual feedback received in relationship the the game construct, one of these being the speed in which the game can be successfully concluded, as time is indeed an investment that players choose to make.
    • So add a different sort of game world that allows players like myself, who prefer a longer term strategy, rather than a 'wham, bam, thank you maam' quickie. Time and money are both investments I choose when to invest and whether I can afford either or both.

      The lack of diplomatic actions to pressure small local states to comply with demands (as would have been the normal case in the past you refer to) leaves only invasion to get past an obstructive little neighbour. Once you invade you have to conquer and there is no giving back available.

      There are games I can go to if I desired to play a military strategy scenario - as your picture above shows, Supremacy 1914 being one of them.
    • Maybe you guys should try it on beta.

      The changes actually reflect the feedback we got from many players, but also what we saw internally in our data.

      We now gave you higher resource productions (money especially) and made the game more exciting because of the reduced times. We hope it will play more dynamic now, with more focus on player interactions instead of being mostly a "single player" game. Actually all 3 strategies should benefit from the change in some way.
    • Try it in beta? I have joined two games in Frontline and they are both stuck and can't start. That's because of your real problem, that you let everyone just start a new game at any time; which they do instead of joining a game already created. If you made players wait until the old ones were full before creating a new one this wouldn't happen.

      And I really don't follow your logic about giving the players more money and making the ai weaker somehow increasing player interactions. If anything it will reduce them.

      Making combat faster won't make it more exciting either, it will just make it more risky to have a night's sleep or take off for a day; and, that will make the game even less playable.
    • Only small AI countries become weaker (and they are designed to be a pushover), the big AI countries (or inactive player countries) become stronger.

      Player interaction with the game is increased because
      a) you have more resources so you can build more stuff in the same time frame
      b) you have faster combat, faster build times and faster admins, which also leads to more interactions in the same time frame
      c) you get bigger rewards when fighting big countries instead of focusing on landgrabbing vs weak AI nations, resulting in increased player interactions due to more meaningful wars.

      These changes should make NWE a more active and dynamic game again.
    • heres my humble another game years ago. my team capt said "troops troops can build all the pretty city's ya want..but if ya dont have the troops to defend it ..its all for nothing..." building an army isnt always about being aggressive... you must be able to protect what you have...i realize im a low level player ..but if you check my stats my military vs economic points are almost even...yet ive won 3 of my last 7 maps (the 4th i stood aside and let my team mate win his first map)and against over a half dozen high level players and agianst more than one by myself on a couple they were content sit back and grow great economic countries yet they ignored growing a military sufficient to protect themselves ,their persons and property,..then cried foul when they got overrun..and even worse.. panicked and quit the map..yet if they had taken a moment..relaxed.. sized up the situation..they as individuals or collectively.. realized that even though i had superior numbers ..i was defeatable ...if ya wanna make beautiful fantastic economic engines in peace and never be monopoly

      The post was edited 1 time, last by captconn ().

    • and for those that think that think by overwhelming numbers im aggressive...the last 3 maps(the ones ive won) each one has been an experiment in how little territory i needed to achieve that balance.. the map im on now ive only taken 4 AI provinces...why my second map i played (the one i gave to my teammate) i came to a realization i had taken way more provinces..i could maintain(rebuilding damage)..Grow(optimizing its resource production)and way more provinces i could protect with the troops i had (275 troops and 12 1st rate ships) the my last 3 maps has been about "how little conquest" i need to achieve the balance of offensive/defensive troops vs the least amount of territory for protections sake i needed but provide resources and manpower for maximum troop levels for the above defensive/offense troops... it does no good to defeat half the AI world if you dont have the troops to keep it..or not let some pion like me come along an take it all away....just sayin...there are plenty of games out there if all ya wanna do is "grind" stuff unopposed by another human mind...

      The post was edited 3 times, last by captconn ().

    • thats why i love the new AI mod..ive sat back and LMAO on the last two maps watching experienced active players get their capitals taken (in one case twice) and quit the game because of an AI nation they attacked....they were so use to aggressivly taking large amouts of AI territory to build thier shiny cities and happy as long they were unmolested by other player..yet now they wanna cry foul that they may have to actually face a real players...sorry im not sympathetic

      The post was edited 4 times, last by captconn ().

    • I prefer a totally different approach and that is by adjusting the Victory Points based on the Path the Player has chosen in the first 5 days which cannot be changed:

      Gets double points for Occupied Provinces,
      1/2 points for Core and colonies

      Gets double points for Colonies
      1/2 points for core and occupied

      Double points for Core provinces
      1/2 points for Colonies and Occupied

      The problem with the speed of battle is that it forces people to check in too much during the clock and that shifts the appeal to people without insomnia.
    • EZ Dolittle wrote:

      I prefer a totally different approach and that is by adjusting the Victory Points based on the Path the Player has chosen in the first 5 days which cannot be changed:
      Intriguing idea! But how would you determine the "chosen path in the first 5 days"? The path in which the player has completed the most research? The path which best reflects the players actual actions in the game (e.g. conquering provinces vs. exploration vs. leveling up core provinces)? Something else altogether (like a 'hard-coded' choice between the three paths)?
      Felix / Alkyonor
      Community Manager
      Bytro Labs GmbH