Please Devs WAKE UP and do something!

Ask your questions on Facebook or Twitter.
It seems that the forums are just for the players now.
Literally the opposite of the new years resolution to communicate more has happened. :person_shrugging:

1 Like

Im pretty sure they won’t answer anyway because they don’t know what is the problem. I bet they don’t even have a end gamer account For the testing…

1 Like

Any dev can make whatever account they want to. Most choose not to.

1 Like

Omg we almost got a salty answer. Too bad she changed her mind…

1 Like

Maybe she lost connection? She may have been practicing for guild wars

Some of you weren’t around when this happened, but I’m sure others will still remember this. Sirrian wrote a post 2 years ago that still remains true.

A few points detailed here have changed since. Yes, I am still active, but now we also have @Cyrup and @Kafka to round out our team! We interact with you here, in support, and on our various social platforms.

And since I’m already here, I will address a few concerns.

  1. Our DAU are not dropping.
  2. Our community and player base are continuing to grow.
  3. Gems of War has some of the highest retention rates seen in a F2P title, which has not changed.
  4. We are in the process of investigating PVP. If we choose to re work PVP, it will require the evaluation of a lot of working parts, and we always want to implement the most holistic long term solution possible. As such, it is not something we are comfortable rushing. When we have more to announce, we will do so.
  5. The main problem that players are experiencing is if you are a high-level player you will be earning less PVP Points/Gold/Rewards for your battles as the game currently considers that you are fighting battles which are easier for your skill level. While this isn’t necessarily always true, the team is aware of this problem and realises it’s frustrating to earn less when you have to fight more battles compared to another player. As mentioned earlier, this is something we are investigating. Unfortunately, it’s a large, complicated problem that affects the overall game design and balancing.
  6. We are active across all parts of the design process.
  7. We listen to feedback, but when it isn’t constructive or largely consists of yelling at the developers, we often choose to not respond.

I know that this doesn’t highlight an immediate solution, but it is the information I have available for you at this point in time. Please be aware that this is on our radar, and is something we are actively looking into.


Look it was a long post, leave me alone @Rickygervais and @HideInShadows . :stuck_out_tongue:


I think part of the problem for a lot of people here (including me) is that something did change with the last update, which was unmentioned, and did seem rushed/not thought-through, or not a holistic/long-term solution.

I, and I think others, would like:

  1. An acknowledgement of the change that did occur
  2. Perhaps an explanation of the thoughts and reasoning behind it, given the usual inclination towards long-term, holistic solutions
  3. An indication of whether or not an acknowledgement of this change to PvP scores in 4.3 affects whether or not it can be addressed sooner than a potential complete PvP rework.

Sorry, to add more to this:

I think the talk about Sirrian( and Nimhain)'s previous activity on the forums was largely (perhaps not by a few) a reminiscence and afterthought around a potential misunderstanding of the problem by the Dev team, which I think you’ve addressed here (:+1:):

I don’t think Sirrian/Nimhain’s relative inactivity on the forums was the main thread of discussion, though, and warranted being the main item of a response, or warranted the relegation of concerns around PvP being a secondary part:

On to the actual concerns, I don’t think the first two points here were particularly mentioned above:

The third point is the interesting one, and while it’s something I’ve heard before, exploring its nuances a little further might be productive, I think.

This is a comparative statement, meaning it only has worth in context. Do F2P titles generally have good retention rates, in general? I have no idea – I could imagine potentially not, given how people talk about them. If not, however, that could easily make the statement worth less.

I also feel like it dances around the points made by above players – the amount of money spent by long-term players compared to newer players was brought up several times. I can understand this potentially being sensitive information, but I do think it was the more salient issue, and worthy of being addressed.

If I’m critical, it’s because I want things to be better :stuck_out_tongue:.


The point that I mentioned were touched on earlier in the thread, so I decided to reply to them all when I was able.

The inactivity of dev presence was mentioned several times, which is why I addressed it directly Unfortunately, it is not something that is going to change, and hasn’t changed in the last year and a half. This is largely due to the growing nature of our game and playerbase.

Retention across f2p games is an important metric, as it can directly impact the health of a game’s economy. I’m not willing to elaborate on this point further, as it would involve drawing from our private metrics that are not made available to the public. Unfortunately, we aren’t in a position to release this information, nor further data regarding the growth of our Daily Active Users.

Can’t dispute an argument based on data that isn’t public.
My data says otherwise about retention… But I guess time will tell.

1 Like

This whole point here is rather annoying to me, as I and many others know this information is kept private, and why.

Even so, it is a frustrating answer to get. I’m sure the game is growing and retention is high based on similar games as metrics, but clearly something is going on as it appears both claims in the playerbase is dying, but the game is growing both are true.

I’ve seen my fair share of retirees and the “endgamers” to replace them, are high level, most of their collection filled, but my cat could do GW on a level 100 account better than them. Even in the upper scale of players, it seems to be the case older, active players who were communicative and self aware are being essentially now filled out by people who are super high level but know little to nothing almost to spite us.

Sunk cost fallacy essentially snares many mid and endgamers, especially us active forum members. We’ve had people come back here and there or keep chugging along simply for how long they have been playing.

Without seeing these metrics, much of this is speculation, but as qualtity recruits dry up, forum miscommunication seems to be on the rise, and the game’s lifelong flaws are ever present, it feels like we get ignored or that there is a serious conversation needing to happen.

You wanna talk metrics, what the heck is gem value, mythic troop value, or traitstones value? Flash sales are nice here and there, but it does not excuse the base shop’s atrocities and the fact a mythic’s traits and levels are worth $35 at a discount.


My problem is just the less gold and PvP points. I used to nerfs and changes going unmentioned or only getting half the information and having to find out the bad stuff another way.

LT tasks got a slight nerf but they failed to mention gems were removed
Good news rare glory packs are only 200 glory now but the devs never mentioned that there is less troops in their now
Tributes were nerfed/fixed but only announced after people found out

It’s clearly obvious to anyone that plays PvP and has even half a brain that last update changed something. Before the update my maximum points were 52 but now I can get up to 70. 52 points was my average but now my average is 30ish while low level and people in guild not completing tasks are 70. Of course it wasn’t mentioned because endgamers got screwed again. Maybe we might get an announcement about it soon but I would only expect half the infomation with all the bad left out.


Just give me my PvP points and Gold back :sob:

1 Like

Ok so now we know devs think nothing changed in 4.3. Sigh…

A huge huge part of the problem is the matches that are getting served up.

A lot of people are only looking at this on the surface level, and on the surface level it just looks like a nerf at endgame. In reality, it is a cascade failure of the constituent parts - disparity of player strengths being highlighted by matchmaking that serves by criteria that are largely irrelevant to the player; because matchmaking doesn’t care about potential payouts and instead go by stuff like PvP rank and player level, where scores, and thus payouts, can vary wildly. Meanwhile, payouts are the biggest thing a player would care about (possibly next to avoiding a certain team for some people) and they are even prominently displayed down the interface, making it also seem intentional that this is something the players are designed to notice, so you can’t really blame them for that either.

At first, I thought it was because there weren’t enough max endgame defenses to go around and serve people with near maxed score potential - after all, you can field a team of significantly lower than your max possible score (eg., firebombs with no hero), but much data gathering of payouts approaching max possible score and what kind of battles, as well as testing on lower level accounts where I am semi-frequently (and nonsensically) served with defense team scores in this range, I’m ready to call machmaking the primary culprit at this point as to why things are so different than pre-patch. If maxed score players got consistently matched with defense teams within 500 points of the highest score team they could field with some degree of regularity, payouts would range in the 1600 to 2k+ range with PvP points over 50 and about 95% of these complaints would disappear.

Heres an example.

After a full week of playing PvP and being at T1 on Sunday, I should not still be seeing a matchmaking screen like this:

When I can field a team with this much score:

I’m only getting crappy rewards on my three trophy because I’m getting served crappy score defense teams. And because of the way matchmaking works, this can last an entire play session. Also, the higher I get toward the point where it is nearly impossible to press my score higher (where level is the only thing left that will increase it at all, and only 1 point every few levels). This compounds with the fact that I seem to be in these “bad” matchmaking pools more often on my higher level accounts, while my lower level accounts that cant even muster 10k score are fighting defense teams with 13.5k score semi-frequently. This is made worse by the fact that the lower level accounts payouts(both gold and PvP points) cap out when I face a team in the high 11k score range, meaning I get nothing extra for beating a team another 2,000 points higher and it would have been far better to serve that team to someone else.

Being roughly 400 points below what the max achievable team score is, I get “good” matches when my opponents are within a few hundred points of my max possible score, like so:

Even this one isn’t so bad (for MSP 13.2k, needs to be 400 points higher on average for MSP 13.6k)

But it is a crapshoot to get these kinds of spreads post-patch

The issue is that pre-patch, “close to max” score covered a far more numerous range of people that would get picked by the various matchmaking criteria and serve you up consistent (lukewarm, but at least consistent) rewards. But even through greater rewards are technically possible for everyone because of the score changes, the general reception for endgamers has been overwhelmingly negative. This is because the number of battles where you get served a lower score opponent have dramatically gone up at endgame, because criteria like player level and how far they made it in PvP this week are almost entirely irrelevant for what makes up the score differential at endgame (score from level is within a few points for everyone post 1000, PvP progress doesn’t affect your score at all), and score determines your payout. Basically, mathcmaking criteria have not kept up with the score formula and it is glaringly obvious when you keep getting three trophy battles versus opponents considered “much weaker”, which is very frustrating when it happens over, and over, and over, which is what people are reacting to here. If you want people to have a PvP experience at endgame that doesn’t make them feel like they are consistently getting “lower rewards” or “penalized for progress”, these matchmaking criteria are no longer sufficient.

Sometimes, it is worth addressing something that is clearly broken with the simplest possible fix rather than wait for it to grate on everyone’s nerves while looking into the perfect possible solution. We need look no further than how long it took for the 50 gem class change fee to get dropped for that. If matchmaking is addressed in the short term, we keep a system that is still “mostly fair” and brings max endgamer payouts back to the “10-20% lower than middle of the pack” range like prepatch, while still properly rewarding actually fighting stronger teams. Then work toward that “holistic long term solution” if necessary. I’m sure whatever that solution would be is likely to benefit from having matchmaking more accurately tuned to relative player strength.


less pvp points and rewards … but we got a working chat and emojis …

Never thought I’d miss the busted chat . Can ya roll back the game version… maybe put the 4.3 patch back in the oven for a bit … seems like it needs to cook some more .


Why do anything at all?
The community here thinks the PvP nerf is complete :poop:.
But evidently GoW is more successful than ever. :person_shrugging:
So why do anything to pay fan service to the veteran members that padded your bottom line. Or kept playing despite all the bugs and constant changes (some good, most bad).

  1. I’m interested to know how many players just log in daily to collect rewards. Compared to those who actually play the game. For instance. I am one person who is active on one account. But I log in daily to my other 4 just to collect rewards in the other accounts. Therefore is that 5 DUA when essentially only 1 is actually playing the game?
  2. By moving to a new platform you’ll see growth. It’s impossible not to. I have no doubt that the Switch player base is growing faster than ever. While other platforms are having less active accounts than ever before.
  3. If retention has always been super high. Then the profit has to be increasing from all the gem to win stuff. If it isn’t, then obviously the original formulas were much more lucrative.

Off the list…
If Retention is high, if DUA is high, and the player base is always growing. Then I don’t want to hear any excuses about how busy the devs are. A couple months ago I was told there hasn’t been any new hires to the team since Nov 2017. At least not on the coding or support side.
If all the private data is correct then the work load has not kept up with staffing.
I’ll believe GoW is dying until I see some new staff faces to tell me how wrong I am. :grinning:

Or until you fix what 4.3cked with my PvP so I no longer care about these things. I’ll be too busy actually playing the game again.

1 Like

Exactly why bother with veterans when they have already spent money on the game when they were lower level.

There is probably a lot. I do that often when I can get my reqs done by just buying the glory troop and collecting tributes. I’ve had a few people like that in my guilds as well they just stop playing and use their gold stash to do reqs for a while and most of them just leave when they run out of gold.

This I have a problem believing. Last year I had to wait 3 weeks to get my second account in to our sister guild and we almost always had a waiting list and when we didn’t we would get someone in a day 2 at most but these days I’m losing people almost weekly and it can take a week to even get someone.

One thing is for certain, this will all end with a pvp rework most certainly not in our favor regarding rewards. Probably some new currency introduced aswell to apparently offset the less gold we will then be getting etc.