Posts by Stringfellow#COM

    I think the main problem around the Heartagram switch was that once the xTools leaders knew that it guarenteed them victory, they just didn't bother organising WW ops. Players were left to organise sending WWKs on their own because the leaders did not care/need to send WWKs. There was a lot of bitching in the chats about this and how many WWs we had that we could not defend - resulting in them all being lower than United's WWs - making us think we had lost it. Throughout this, the xTools leaders just arrogantly told us that they had it under control when we could just see WWs getting all their def wiped and no WWK runs organised.


    This was a really bad way to organise a race because not only did it totally **** over United, but it was already really demoralising for the xTools players who were logging in each day to try and hold the WWs togather as well as the many attacks on our borders...yes, all is fair in love and war, but I think I will go back to the country servers where people actually think about the following server (and whether you will want to play with them again) rather than just crapping all over you for this win.

    The problem with this attitude is that many of your governors then get pssied off with you because you have not lowered taxes - as everyone has shown many times that this is the most beneficial to the kingdom. Maybe this is the reason most of your large governors have quit Marius...

    It is much cheaper to upgrade palace to 15 than residence to 20. It may be too late to do this in your account, but I find the best way to keep an expansion slot free in towns is to palace 15 (settle 2x) then demolish palace and build residence 1, then palace 15 in another town (settle 2x) and then you will have many towns with slots for making 2 chiefs :)

    Wood/Clay/Iron depends on how much resource is made on the server - so this goes up over time


    Crop goes up over time too, but then also goes up by the number of treasures in your kingdom. Treasures impact crop much more than anything else.

    It's about INFLUENCE, not troops.


    Troops increase influence. So does population and treasures. If he has a city (extra 500pop) or treasures then he will exert massive influence compared to you, even with just 1 troop in there. Get him to remove all troops. I have a king with 40,000 treasures and he can exert more influence with 1 troop 10 squares away than I can right next door!

    Here is a list of the top10 least used buildings in com2...


    3300 active players
    GB/GS takes over 1,000,000 resources to run every day at level 5 ONLY and over 2 million at level 20. This is 8/16 villages, respectively (let's assume a capital city crop feeds this army).
    Top 10 raiders are only raiding 1-3,000,000 per day so every player on the server is not going to raid everything you need to feed this


    There are only about 50 players on the server with 8+ towns, and about 30-40% of them will be defence/anvils. 60% of 50 is 30.


    82 GBs and 44 GS - 24 GB being used. 24/30 = 80%.


    THEREFORE, IT APPEARS THAT MOST OF THOSE OFFENSIVE PLAYERS WHO CAN AFFORD TO, HAVE BUILT AND ARE RUNNING GB/GS :rolleyes: These buildings will be taken up by more people as the server ages, but at this stage they are for the top 1%...


    Therefore, I propose that maybe you do not need to adjust things to "increase" the usage of these buildings...

    Ummm...100k (of crop) is not that massive...I agree that GB/GS armies is a natural evolution in TK due to the loss of artifacts. Though, players can still choose to run multiple armies, etc if they want...However, I do not believe this is the right way to go about it:
    1. they were already increased in balance by being able to decrease their chiefability by increase of loyalty to 200%
    2. now you can't build GB/GS until you increase town to city, which says very early in the game HEY I HAVE A GREAT ARMY IN THIS TOWN COME AND GET IT. Sure, later in the game, 1000 pop towns made this obvious, but you could make it less obvious. It also removes the option of not building a city and using the CP elsewhere...
    3. GB/GS in capital makes virtually undestroyable (via chiefing, etc) giant armies that tonnes of people will sim up for WW rather than fighting for treasures IMO

    The intuitive thing about not having GB/GS in capital was that it was a double training boost against extra cost and extra defending risk. TK already reduced the exposure by increasing city loyalty to 200% (anyone building an army town would be silly not to make it a city). It also made those running GB/GS towns the elite offensive players. Artifact trainers lowered this element, which I think it is AWESOME how TK has removed these and made it so you have to run army town to have the biggest armies. To make GB/GS in capital eliminates one of the very few elite facets of the game - building the army town and dodging the chief.


    You need to retain some elements of this game for risk takers and elite players who come back server after server, rather than dumbing the entire game down for farmville types. I plead for you to just focus on fixing the current balances for now and the bugs - save these things for Kingdoms version 2, etc once we have more testing down and player feedback...I know you are trying to differentiate this from T4, but this is just trying to fix what is not broken.


    Making a capital city chiefable is a laughable concept. This means you can take out someone's level 18/19 fields instantly with 2 waves of 3 senators each, rather than 8 catapult waves of over 1600 catapults - the latter being fair considering the time and effort it takes to build the capital. Please try running some of these concepts past focus groups of people who actually know this game rather than just implementing them broadly across live servers...

    I think the change is just rude. GB/GS in capital is just a totally rubbish idea - who asked for this?


    I have had 2 armies chiefed - both well over 100K. But both times it took about 6 hammers to take my army town out and a lot of green medals. I still build army towns because there is an epic benefit. TKs already gives you the benefit in that a city is 200% loyalty and that is 2x as hard to chief. If you cannot see a chief coming and defend it, you deserve to lose your army town.


    The only other reason for doing this is to make the big gold users spend even more gold in capitals because of the info in daniel's post - it removes the space in capital's by 4-5 for those who make army towns...TK is already expensive. We are already so far up the end of the gold supply-demand curve here that you cannot milk that much more out of the gold users...you are going to get inelasticity coming in and things like this are going to bite you in the ***.


    - - - Updated - - -


    Also, about the treasure bonus, as a duke, I am about to get even more flooded by crop...

    I challenge the game designers to say why they have done this, without us asking for it. I believe it is because:


    1. TK has loads of crop, meaning we are not building UBER capitals, and spending A LOT of gold making uber capitals
    2. Without army in capital, and faster crop field building, we do not need to insta-build capitals, resulting in less gold usage
    3. Non-cap hammer with 25% extra storage results in MASSIVE storage in capital with very little NPC, resulting in less gold usage
    4. if they make GB/GS allowable in capital, this results in 4-5 more army buildings in capital, reducing storage in capital by 30-40%, resulting in A LOT more NPC/insta/gold usage


    TK already has a higher pay-to-play. Come and tell us that this is a change in the game dynamic to make building big capitals cost more for gold users...