As long as they want a game that encourages several different strategies, that'll always be the case. That pleases a lot of players, and not others. When they chose to give it this one weakness, it presumably means that they want to change the balance of the game slightly towards defense/attack. No matter what, the Cherry Garden had to have some weakness(es). It comes down to a choice between weaknesses and strengths in order for it to be possible to motivate, the Garden would have to be at most half as good when unmotivated, and only one building, so as to be possible to loot all at once, when not motivated. These strengths are a compensation for the absence of motivation. In other words, only one fifth of the benefits can be lost at once. Also, it isn't completely without protection from plundering only three of the buildings can be looted, and only one at a time. They have multiple bonuses connected to being a set, in place of motivation bonus, and these add up to a much better total than than standard motivation bonus. If you have the full set, the Cherry Garden buildings are extremely good, with only one weakness no motivation. Of course, for those who never manage to improve their gameplay, a boring game may be preferable, however, you'd be hard pressed to find a game developer who has these as their target group.

A game without obstacles to overcome, and no unpleasant consequences of slouching, is a very boring game. Remove or weaken the incentive to plunder, and the incentive to avoid being plundered also disappears.įinally, it also makes the game more challenging and exciting for non-fighters. All of this pulls players deeper into the game, forces them to set higher ambitions for their city development, and, in the end, makes them more likely to end up buying diamonds.

To avoid becoming the neighborhood punching bag, you have to collect goods on time, develop military technologies, earn and spend tavern silver, have troop buildings, complete quests and events for troops and defense boost, build GBs, and more. The risk of plundering is a major incentive even for non-fighters to put more effort into the game. That means that juicy buildings can't be plunder-proof.įrom Inno's perspective, it's about more than just loosing fighting players. Since GvG is unavailable to most, the opportunity to plunder is the bare minimum necessary to call it a 'strategy game'. Personally, I think the war element is far to weak, and would like to see some real consequences of PvP attacks, both in damage to the looser and rewards for the winner. Because plundering is an important element of the game.

Forge of empires event buildings