By Fiene
When Historical Allies first arrived in Forge of Empires, the goal was never to create a short-term addition that would disappear into the background after a few updates. From the beginning, the feature was envisioned as something that could continue growing alongside Forge itself.
With the Historical Allies Evolution system and additional progression mechanics, Historical Allies are entering their next major phase. To talk a bit more about that process, we sat down with Karl, Product Manager behind Historical Allies, to discuss player feedback, iteration approach, and how the feature evolved over time.
The Original Idea
What was the original “problem” Historical Allies were meant to solve?
Space in Forge is always rare, and players sometimes hold dear their buildings they’ve built up over time, so we wanted to create another progression layer that wouldn’t compete with that. Historical Allies gave us a way to add a meaningful new layer on top of the existing city. It also created a long-term progression system: something for players to work toward and use to personalize their experience. On top of that, characters simply create a different emotional connection than buildings do. We’d seen across the industry and in our own games that players build connections with characters in a way that structures simply don’t.
When did you realize this could become a long-term system rather than just a feature?
Honestly, that was the plan from the beginning. We never really saw Historical Allies as a one-off feature and the idea was always to build something players could keep progressing over time. The bigger question for us was how to introduce it in iterations that made sense for both the game and the players.
Adapting Through Feedback
Was there a moment where you thought: “we need to rethink this”? What triggered it?
Not really in a fundamental way, but there was one area where we noticeably changed direction. Early designs had a lot more randomness in them, with allies getting variable bonuses players could customize. Over time, we realized that wasn’t really creating the kind of experience we wanted. Players were pretty clear that randomized rewards didn’t feel great, and internally we also saw that it pushed things too far into min-maxing, where players spent a lot of time trying to figure out the perfect setup. It also made the whole system harder to understand because it wasn’t always obvious what actually made an ally good.
One thing we kept hearing from our players was that Forge is already quite complex, so we started simplifying parts of the system and focusing more on readability and clearer decision making. The rework of the Historical Allies window came from the same mindset. But the overall direction of the feature never really changed, it was more about refining the idea and making it more approachable.
Historical Allies Evolution and Iteration
Evolution is a big shift. What design problem does it solve that leveling couldn’t?
Evolution gave us a way to make allies feel more distinct from each other since every evolution stage unlocks new skills, which is something leveling alone couldn’t really deliver in the same way. It also adds another progression for players who had already invested heavily into their allies and were looking for new goals to work toward. And practically, it solves a real player pain point around duplicate allies. Instead of duplicates feeling wasted, players now can disband them for Tokens and use those to strengthen allies they actually want to invest in. So overall, it helped turn what was often a frustrating reward into something more meaningful.
What does “iteration” actually mean in practice for a feature like this?
For us, iteration means not trying to ship the entire vision all at once. Instead, you start with a version of the feature that already works as a solid experience on its own, even if some of the bigger systems and layers are still planned for later. That part is important because players need something they can genuinely engage with, otherwise, the feedback we get isn’t very valuable. Once the feature is in players’ hands, we look at how they actually use it, what works, what causes friction, and where we want to expand things further. From there, we keep refining and building on top of it step by step.
It also fits the reality of a live game like Forge. The game keeps evolving, player priorities shift over time, and something that feels right today might not feel right anymore in a year or two. Working in iterations gives us regular checkpoints where we can reassess things and adapt based on the current state of the game instead of locking ourselves into one huge development cycle. Which, to be fair, can happen when you have an ambitious team.
How do you decide when a system is ready to release vs. needs more iteration?
We mostly define the release criteria already during the design phase. We agree upfront on what an iteration needs to include before we consider it ready to release. But at the end of each development cycle, we also do an internal playtest where the whole team sits together and plays the feature (internally, we call it “Dojo”). If the feature feels complete and offers meaningful interaction, we feel confident releasing it. If not, we keep working on it. Before anything goes to Live markets, we also use Beta to collect real player feedback and data, and that naturally plays a big role in deciding whether we’re ready to proceed further or need additional iteration first.
Balancing Vision and Feedback
How much did player feedback vs. internal vision shape each step?
I don’t really see it as player feedback versus internal vision. These two usually work together rather than against each other. We obviously start with an internal idea of what we want the feature to become, in this case, giving Historical Allies more meaningful long-term progression. But while building that out, we’re constantly looking at player feedback as well and trying to understand where expectations and frustrations are coming from.
But sure, at the same time, there’s also the practical side of development. A lot of decisions ultimately come down to feasibility: how much time something takes, how complex it is to implement, whether it fits the current priorities, and so on. Realistically, we can’t act on every single piece of feedback, even if we’d like to. So the vision mostly helps us decide where it makes sense to invest our time. With Historical Allies, that balance has worked out pretty well so far, in my opinion, because player feedback has generally supported the direction we already wanted to take the feature in.
Was there a point where iteration significantly changed the original direction?
Not really, no. As I mentioned, player feedback and our internal vision stayed pretty aligned throughout the process, so we never had a moment where we felt we needed to COMPLETELY rethink the feature. Most of the iterations were more about refining things, simplifying certain aspects, and gradually adding new layers to the system rather than changing direction entirely. The core idea behind Historical Allies stayed surprisingly consistent from the beginning.
Looking Ahead
What does “success” for Historical Allies look like in a year, and what are your HA plans going forward?
Well, success means Historical Allies becoming a natural part of everyday Forge gameplay rather than feeling like a separate side system. I think players already felt for a while that something was still missing there, and honestly, they were right. Rarity and Evolution systems simply weren’t in place yet, which left open questions around duplicate allies or how players could continue improving the allies they already invested in. Now those systems are starting to come together: players can unlock new skills, evolve their allies, and make more meaningful decisions about which allies they actually want to focus on rather than feeling forced to invest in all allies.
Looking ahead, I’d really love to see players actively building up their collections, chasing new allies, experimenting with different combinations, and continuing to develop them over time. That’s where Historical Allies really starts feeling like the system we originally wanted it to become, and I’m happy to be part of it.
Curious to learn more about the recent Historical Allies update in Forge?
We’re in a good spot now, especially with the new Historical Allies arriving in our King Arthur’s event, which builds directly on the recent Evolution and rarity updates. Starting on June 18th, players on our Live servers will be able to recruit legendary figures such as King Arthur, Merlin, and Morgan Le Fay, each bringing their own identity and new abilities into the growing Historical Allies system. Below, you can already take a first look at these new Allies and how they look in-game!
Sharpen your strategy, prepare your city, and join us in Forge of Empires!