One City Challange

  • Hello,

    we've talked about this already or better to say i've mentioned it already :)

    So the idea is, to disable settlers and senators/chiefs so each player can have ONLY SPAWN village and that's it, no new villages no chiefing etc. While this system would be unplayable on legends, i think it'd fit perfectly to kingdoms, why ?

    1st of all, with current system kings recive tributes, governers hideouts/camps and dukes little of each, so there's bonus production which you don't get in legends and can make playing one city little lighter. Than next thing there is, teams would be much smaller, governors would have to work with their kings and vice versa, because there would be no gain if you try to help "enemy" kingdom, because it'd be impossible to join them (you would have to make some changes, that player can be in another kingdom than his area one only if he/she is duke), teams would be much much smaller, there'd be much more action around, because it's ww number is limited, and there'd be much more kingdoms wanting to get ww, so you'll have to deal with some before they arrive etc., players would have to work together even more than they do now, we all know, that in most kingdoms there're 5-10 active people doing everything, while other 100 is just "playing" ....

    Anyway i think such server shouldn't be too hard to start, maybe as next test server ? So we all can see where it'll bring us, but at least in my opinion it'd make game less boring and more fun for all

  • So the idea is, to disable settlers and senators/chiefs so each player can have ONLY SPAWN village and that's it, no new villages no chiefing etc.

    ...and there'd be much more kingdoms wanting to get ww...

    I like this idea as well but how would you get a WW village, when no chiefing is allowed? Or do you think about some system like the one of oases? A mix of influence of troops and population in an area, let's say, 20x20 around the WW? These would create a total new strategic way...not only the WW villages would get targets but all "spawn" villages around it to, as they influence it. And what to do about all the inactive villages around a WW?

    Would love to here more ideas about this...

  • No, influence wouldn't be solution, as people would be spread around "randomly", so those spawned closer to ww would have advantage. Maybe chiefs could be unlocked together with ww's ?

    Only other thing to change would be to get natar villages away, so they couldn't be chiefed. Other player villages couldn't be chiefed as all would be capital villages. Maybe for start, they could just add 1mio units to natarian villages, those on 15c i mean, so they'd be basicly undefitable...

  • Pretty fun idea though couple of things.
    1) Duke invites would have to be removed if you actually wanted there to be no way to join other kingdoms (outside of kingdom using a duke to cover you)
    2) Map would have to be changed and made smaller. I propose 4 wonders at 0.30, 0.-30, 30.0 -30.0 or something similar so action is bit more concentrated.

    I don't see this working as a full duration server as well, without additional villages to scale up troop production there is no recovering should you lose any units. I'm thinking something like 30 or maybe 60 days tops. Win condition would have to be changed a bit. Probably something like wonders open at day 1, and who ever captures and builds theirs up to lvl 20 wins for example.

  • if you cant chief WW then why not make it a source to get treasures that always has defense and treasures or has them like every 24h or so once so you dont have to take hold of WW, but just go get some treasures to put growing VP in your own king village.In this case maybe change something about treasury limits

    Would be contest who gets more treasures from these and other players plus who gets there first.

    Maybe other natars also treasure sources with less treasures
    ...or WW unlimited source and regular natars refilling every 48h

    //-_-/ -_-/ -_-/- - (:?l) - -/-_- /-_- /-_-//

    :/wether to game or to get gamed;)

    :)There lies the question:S

    -. ... .. .. ?.!.?:!::?::!:?.!.?. .. .. ... .-

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