Posts by Renuo#EN

    Disgusted to just learn that you can delete while in vacation mode.


    While I haven't personally lost from this, a player that I know of took a significant risk to clear a player, then that player immediately activates vacation mode and deletes before this player can chief.


    How about we just make it so you don't fight and just build the WW and hold hands together?


    Stop putting in deterrents to combat! We now all have to factor in how likely a player has to do this before considering any action like catapulting or chiefing or ensuring you can do it all within 48 hours or else may as well no bother with the costs and losses.


    What a disgrace. I see in "similar threads" this being discussed last October. No changes at all. Really?


    I am still to find 1 person use this for a damn vacation btw.

    Ridder might have missed the real question.


    For the kingdom to take control, you will need to both win the oasis by battle, but also it needs to be in borders or at least on the edge of the border (including diagonally).


    Yes, you can maintain your name in the oasis but you won't be able to get the troop bonuses until it is under the control of your kingdom as above.


    Your position in the oasis is also not just ranked by the number of troops but also by nearby population. Total influence is determined by the formula presenting on the screen of the oasis itself.

    The point about not being able to login and do things is a big one.


    Hang on, I thought you were on vacation?? Why are you rebuilding all your walls that were destroyed 48 hours ago and preparing defense??


    Big tick for dukes/kings being disallowed this feature. It is a commitment to hold a treasury and is a key part of the game so should never be invulnerable (this goes for "banning" too).

    We've had this feature available for a while now, and I've yet to see this be used for vacations.
    All I'm seeing is people using it to save villages from being destroyed and getting a reprieve from being farmed.


    These are active players making this choice strategically. I am yet to hear of any player in the game use this tool for a vacation.
    In fact, the only players I've known that have gone on a vacation or small period of leave since this tool was introduced have found it better to use the already existing tools (sitter/dual) as it is better for their account.


    My preference would be for this feature to be removed completely, but I can see there being a need for something to assist players with being able to do something if they leave for a short while.


    Some alternative suggestions would be to completely stop you from doing all actions (not rebuild your walls etc.) or give only protection to the troops, not your resources.


    Honestly I don't have great alternative ideas, but something needs to change because this is not being used for the intentions it was implemented for.

    Hi Maretta, to go with what Curtain suggests, I would add that it is good to keep in mind buildings you are going to be wanting to use in that village anyway.


    Low levels of certain buildings (that you might want to make use of) are still decent boosters of population without such significant resource costs.


    Town hall for example will be in most of your villages, and is good for pop increase.

    I will warn you about settling inside or near a strong kingdom as a solo player.


    Some strong kingdoms will not welcome outsiders without consultation (or at all), and settling in their borders is a sure fire way to ruin your server.


    If you luck out in your starting position and find yourself already in the boundaries of one of these, make yourself hard to farm and settle your second village somewhere out of their reach.
    So I guess the above is another reason for settling far from where you start ;)

    Alright so I get the point of this being a stradegy game and there being ways to counter chiefing. That is not an issue
    My issue is with how am I supposed to prevent this from happening every time. The player I tried to chief had 2 villages and would always simply change capital based on what village I tried to chief.
    I could of course look for some mind games and send fake chief to his other village and stuff, but it would still give me 50% chance of success or even less with my chief reducing loyalty somewhat randomly (and yes I know how the system works on that) so just does not seem very fair that I have to do all that while the person that I´m trying to chief only has to pay the cost of a new palace in this case.


    So I would suggest that what if there was a 3 day cooldown on changing capitals (1 on speed) it would give some counterplay to this and would force defenders to think twice before changing capitals away without a care in the world.

    You're already massively screwing him, but kinda wasting your own time too. I'm not sure how far into the game this is for you or what you have available, but it is far better to hit with multiple chiefs.

    Every time someone out-skills a noob he will start crying and calling it an abuse.Seeing it all over the place:don't reinforce inactives,don't relocate croppers,don't change capitals.


    Let's take every strategic plays out of the game and make it 100% predictable and straightforward(and boring as well).

    I know hell might freeze over for me saying this, but I agree with you 100%.


    There needs to be a limit on people just instantly posting a new thread after facing some moderate difficulty for the first time in this game.

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Absolutely.


    Not experiencing it right now, but in previous servers have come across purposely made multis in order to break influence areas with banned accounts.


    It should never be beneficial to be permanently banned.

    Why do you want to make this game so easy ?

    I don't really mind if this suggestion is implemented or not and not really a fan or a hater of this idea... but it is honestly not that much "harder" to do 4 left clicks.


    This is honestly not going to change the raid amounts at all.



    Treasures are what you need to accumulate points to win the game.


    Sure, defend a player when you aren't going to leave your TEAM'S treasures to be taken.


    Your team was rank 1 for a reason.


    Also your opinion is not coming from knowledge of winning the game, so that might be a good reason why they aren't liking it.


    If you're not playing to win the game, why keep score?

    -thats why u rarely see a big roman hammer compared to teuton hammer so it evens out , i am playing os speed server its been around 20 days, the largest teuton hammer i have seen was 19k clubs 6k tk while roman hammer wasnt even half of this number

    By your own admission in a thread not too long ago you are new to the game. Please listen carefully to what we are telling you here.


    You will learn better making less claims yourself and instead discovering through everyone elses experience.


    10k clubs isn't more powerful than 7k imperians (for example). The raw number of troops is not the most meaningful aspect.

    There are many pros and cons to playing each of the tribes.


    I favour Teutons and have played the tribe almost exclusively from release of the original game.
    Likely a lot like yourself I like the highly aggressive style where you can replenish fast even in the worst case scenario.


    Having said that there are many pros and cons to all of the tribes and Teuton is certainly not so insurmountably better that you need no Romans.


    Given the same player activity / skill level there are natural areas where Romans are superior:

    • Mid to late game farming as EIs take over (TK is barely faster than infantry)
    • Expanding wide
    • Best attack/crop comfortably
    • Early game legio can be a very flexible troop for both defense and offense (obviously unlike the club)
    • Early to mid game the Roman wall is far more useful for the higher defence bonus (and in general where it isn't a hammer attack where you will certainly lose wall bonus).


    The brewery is also not something you will always want in an offensive action either, as you lose the ability to target catapults and chiefs are less effective.


    I'm sure there are some things here and there I'm missing, but yes there are good and bad things about every tribe, Teutons are not the only offense worth having.

    I really don't think that would be a problem.
    Most of those kings are governors at heart and don't intend to stay in that position for very long at all.
    They aren't interested in forming any sort of community. You got lucky in that experience to be honest.


    This won't reduce the amount of kings from week 2-3ish on, but it will eliminate both this spam and abuse of kings at the very first few days.


    The role of king in this game is extremely misleading in that start screen.
    Many take it on as a whim, but to not be completely destroyed (or simply absorbed) you need to be very experienced at least and have other experienced friends joining you in the best case scenarios.


    All new players will still learn about the role of the king, but you will have less players quitting because of being very new and getting totally wiped out and more joining stronger kingdoms and learning from others.