And yes, odd that the initial community feedback didn't really say "nerf orcs hard" but it happened. The initial feedback did say undead war hero was crazy and neither was touched. Guess we can tell which race and personality the new guys favor. ;)
Printable View
And yes, odd that the initial community feedback didn't really say "nerf orcs hard" but it happened. The initial feedback did say undead war hero was crazy and neither was touched. Guess we can tell which race and personality the new guys favor. ;)
to be fair I think a better trade off would be a minor sci penalty still but lose the reduced military losses. The 20% extra damage is enough to punish a large orc attacker, the tpa loss is more of a slap in the face with a wet noodle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Verminator
Dropping 2-3 tm's in a war still leaves anywhere from 6-8 untouched.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slayerviper
UD is not overpowered with 15/1. Weak weak dpa even army in. A kd of orcs vs uds leans very heavily to the orcs with +kills if they wave all the uds army in. That's 3-4x army in on all attackers. Goodbye opa on the UD
sorry I should have note I only played in a 25 man KD twice so 3 t/ms is pretty huge in the 21-23 range. I don't factor army home because if your caught with army home your failing the KD with inactivity and your province is going to get toasted getting hit army home, doesn't matter what you are unless your a dorf or human.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitty87
You don't have to be an Orc, but there will always be at least 3 in The Virtual Kingdom.
Proposed changes are just that. How about 15%? or 10%? resource losses.
Half the fun is baiting faery to retal. That 20% makes them feel like George McFly punching Biff.
You're my density.
More like hello opa, good bye total offense! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitty87
War hero seems too strong and also all over the place - the +10% gains is too nice a buff to also have everything else it has. As it is now, seems like the top be all WH cores, with +gains, more honor from randoming, being able to WS while whoring and not anoning, ect.
I think lowering it to like +10% resources lost on attacks, and +5% military casualties, and the -10% tpa is more than enough negatives to put on the orc.Quote:
Originally Posted by StratOcastle
Even if they keep high self casualties, it wouldn't be the first ever race to be pidgeon-holed into a specific personality (in this case, cleric).
It also does make avian/human/dwarf more appealing which is always a nice change too.
Hidden gem may just be avian/cleric with its animate dead/leet credits synergy.
But yea, they need to make orc negatives like half as negative, and still need to make UD a little worse.
I really like the direction and strengths of elf and halfer, and the t/m personalities are fine.
I feel Faery is still a bit weak. (great as an UB don't get me wrong) but outside of Faery/Heretic I dont see them getting much play. They are just in kind of an awkward spot where their econ is absolutely terrible compared to halfer and elf, and they don't do any job as good as them (other than as I said fae/heretic, but even that will get rocked hard by all the halfer rogues there will be this age). Oh well I guess there is always 1 weak t/m every age. Why not have it be fae's turn.
And exactly how do you propose to keep the growth kingdoms to the "growth" server? What's to prevent them from just playing for growth on the "war" server?Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldhearted
And for there to be growth there needs to be something to grow off, so your concept is unfeasible.
Silly as it may be, but simply removing the land rankings and net worth rankings is likely to cause most growth kingdoms to quit, I think. So then if that guess is true, its as simple as keeping one server with those rankings and one server without.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elldallan
Anther suggestion could be to, award x amount more acres than the next largest acre holder and net worth holder end of age to whomever wins the most wars on one server.
Edit: and in like manner award second place war win leader so that kingdom ends up second in land and NW end of age; and on and on.
Idea:
Currently the land rankings has 1 measuring moment: EOA. Whoever is biggest at EOA will win.
How about: the landcrown is measured by the KD who for most ticks during the age has been in #1 spot?
It would make competition extremely fierce, as KDs can't afford to do long CFs because it might mean 1 KD gets to hold #1 for 4-5 weeks unopposed. Final charts will look something like:
Emeriti: 859 ticks
Sparta: 482 ticks
etc etc.
Do you get a medal in the 25km marathon for staying in first place for the first half, only to burn out towards the end? First place is first place, however cruel it might be :P
I am talking about creating a different meta. For instance in the war server I would create a system that doesn't allow for interaction besides an agreed war. You can't attack, steal or do anything against anyone until both of you agree to war. Then you would be able to set a date and then would be allowed to interact with each other. Also I would get rid of the explore pool for the most part, limit kingdom sizes to 22 and create a tournament for the top 10 kingdoms near the end of the age. There are alot of possibilities that could be adjusted of course. But a warring server is possible and would be a blast. Only two crowns would be honor and war crown. War crown would go to the winner of the tournament. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Elldallan
A better idea would be for warring KDs to step out of their comfort zone and actually learn how to properly whore, understand the meta of growth. Dont blame those that invest time into the meta for warring KD's laziness.
Soon as u realize that an entire age is simply one agreed war and u fight everyone but you for 12 weeks, continuously, the sooner u will also learn to enjoy it.
Next we know we want a new server without gc "because some people suck at econ management" and just want everything to be free.
Or land dropping gets punished with a mechanic.
Completely wrong, I actually played back in the day before there was even a war stance. I don't mind whoring at all but the player base is now a warring first mind set that prefers agreed wars. Your missing the point I am talking about changing the meta on a different server not what the current meta is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart of Sparta
Rather than create a soft server Id rather make it easier IRL-uto wise for more relaxed KDs to still compete. Good solution would be shared provs on a 12/12 schedule and less emphasis on OOW whoring. Perhaps the landbased gains just introduced will "help".
http://i.imgur.com/XkFcrSn.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by Bart of Sparta
But seriously, I doubt this will ever happen.
Sure if the customer base wanted that, it would be a good idea. Issue is there are only 3 to 5 whoring based kingdoms left. That's a total of 125 people. That's a extremely small customer base to invest into a second server. Growth meta is old and tired, really no one wants to do it anymore. It's just not fun anymore for alot of different reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart of Sparta
TB Changes.
Would it be possible to have a change to taxing of aid so that Kingdoms can't jungle 200k soldiers back and forth to cheat the nw range when attacking?
Soldiers need some attention anyway, seems 1.5 nw for a 2/2 unit is far to low compared to specs where a 0/6 unit has Three times the def, no off and 4 times the nw. Also no wages for soldiers... Make soldiers 1/1 again, 2/2 is too much and changing the nw wouldn't target the aiding problem. Half wages for sols would also be good.
Why not make all KDS 20 players Max. In-areas off some being 10-15 and some 19-25. Bullys is the biggest drop of players. We grow our player base fr.o.m. 22 since 24 and 25 man KDS started to hit us with higher acres/ nw and player base thinking they where good. But a fair fight they suck. Make the game more even here and players Will stay Much longer
And then next age it will be 17-18 province kingdoms complaining about the mean 20 player kingdoms hitting them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deathlyric
Fixed the important area. That is the area that is not fun for 90% of the server. Majority of people play utopia as a warring game, and I get that in its current form it is set up as a "Here's guidelines, do whatever you want, game" but to think that warring kingdoms should give up their fun, so whoring oriented kingdoms have "more people to play with up top" is faulty thinking imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart of Sparta
The one MAJOR aspect of changes I am surprised noone is talking about, is the new War Win Bonus. Land reward bonus is a lot of land, and now it is being increased to 1.5x that land. I think warring kingdoms are blinded by the thought of 1.5x more honour that they don't realize that if you string 2-3 war wins together you are likely in the top 10 land/nw and now have to play with people that will farm you out and have their own set of rules.
It is going to be a very harsh age for some warring kingdoms I think who will get a few wars and then not know what to do when the top 5 come around to take their land and make deals with their own language on terms and how that works.
As a warring kingdom who generally sits in the top 10 by eoa, i can appreciate forcing kingdoms who have high war wins, but constantly stay small (*Cough CoL*) and force them to have to expose themselves to tougher opponents. Not sure that this is the way though.
If this War Win Bonus change goes through I think we NEED to have at least 4 day eowcf, even if it means 2 day max fort or something. Kingdoms coming out of a war will be very weak, and have now grown a ton of land and honour. This will just encourage further the meta of large kingdoms hitting a kingdom ruthlessly after eowcf ends to take that land/honour. Every kingdom in the top 20 that wins a war will be ruthlessly attacked im sure by all of the top 5 kingdoms straight oow. It will be a battle to see who can poach and gain as much off these "overgrown warring kd" that pop up. It will just turn into an age of "Warring Kingdom Whack-a-mole" One comes up, BONG, you knock them back down ruthlessly and decisively.
Warring kingdoms are going to need to be prepared to retaliate, and I don't think 3 day eowcf is going to give them that time (lets not pretend that fort matters here, because they will get vultured right through fort, almost preferrably because going into a fresh fort will mean they are more likely to not retaliate).
No just let the KD auto fill to 20, or let KDs auto fill to 25, as opposed to stopping at 22. Why have to use invites to have a Full KD. You still have the option of paying additional wages to put up "the wall" against randoms coming in, but at least everyone would have the option to auto fill to a full KDQuote:
Originally Posted by jmiedema
Regarding War Hero adding honour for attacks in/out of war, can we get a bit more clarification as to the level of bonus this is, as it would very much change the personalities balance.
Is it something like "5% of the honour gained from your out of war attacks, and 10% of the honour gained from your in-war attacks, is added additionally to your province, but not removed from the opponents honour"
so if I hit an opponent for what would usually grant me 100 honour, now I will get 105 honour oow, and 110 honour in war, and the opponent will lose 100 honour regardless? Something like that? Would be good to know the level of bonus that is being talked about. @Jeff @David
Also, +1 off spec value on Avian is a super awkward bonus now that they have elite credits.. I really dont see any time (realistically) that an avian would choose to train an ospec over a leet.
I would propose to change +1 offensive specialist strength to be +1 defensive specialist strength. I think this would help avian keep pace with their role that (should be) to hit fast and have some minor turtle ability. Since you guys said your direction is for attackers to make more choices about leaving defense home. I think Avian would benefit greatly from that change.
change orc +20% Enemy casualties when attacking to +20% Enemy casualties and orc will be fine ... maybe just add ambushed land will get destroyed instead
make undead elite 12 nw
there should be race spells and personality spells don't mix these two (pointing at bart - no bloodlust for undeads)
all elites i post are if they remain unchanged
avian: Elite: 11/4, 775gc, 10NW
Dwarf: Elite: 9/8, 850gc, 9.5NW
Halfling: Elite: 6/8, 700gc, 10NW
Faery: Elite:5/10, 1050gc, 11.5NW
elf: Elite: 8/7, 900gc, 9.5NW
Undead: Elite: 15/1, 10.5NW (though there is no elite training between WH bonus and natural revival for them its stupid an undead war hero well start the age at 12,000 offensive not counting training)
im not saying make races unbreakable but at least balance it a bit better
a faery cost for protection is insanely high. where as an elf unless they are an attack wont build elites at all because they have 0/8 d-spec units
from what i have seen of your changes these past few ages have been heavy in the favor of attackers
Or instead of Orc negatives being a straight +20% resources lost when attacked and +15% casualties, maybe have them more effected by ambush only (not general Trad Marches)Quote:
Originally Posted by klaabu
So Orc Negatives would be changed to:
+30% military losses when ambushed
+30% resources lost when ambushed
-10% TPA
Something Like that. Currently a semi-chain of Trad Marches is about as good as a deep chain vs an orc. straight +20% resources lost is ridiculous.. unplayable.
But if you change the effect around being ambushed (low defense elite already makes them susceptible to ambush) it adds a bit more strategic depth, and makes them playable.
I have played T/M last like 4-5 ages in a solid Warring KD. I completely disagree with this statement. Faeries have been overpowered almost all these ages (I played 2 of those ages as Fae/ro and 3 of those ages as Fae Heretic) I have never felt in trouble vs a kingdom of heavy attackers. Sure I'm breakable at the start of war, but if left alone for 12h I'm generally UB. and op'ing power hasn't changed much during that time, if anything the increase from last age (+20% op damage) to this age (+40% op damage) made them even stronger..Quote:
Originally Posted by soloni
This age Rogue and Heretic got a HUGE buff in the fact that Clear Sight will be FAR less used (only tactician has it, and tact is not really a tier 1 pick with current changes)
Hey there I know there's a lot of post here but here are the changes that in my opinion should be implemented.
#1 orcs reduce the ressource losses to -10% (the main tool to bring down targets is overpop and when you get 4-5 hits out and get 30 in the 20% loss is more annoying than the 25% gain. Even with diminishing returns.
#2 cleric needed a buff and it was given one only thing I don't like is that the buff is irrelevant for avian since they already have greater prot. Cleric could have a population growth bonus instead.
#3 swap gluttonny to heretics it's a spell and it's on a rogue+ the current heretic spells are not that good and with the rogue and mystic buff they need a little help.
#4 tacticians are falling out of grace with the war hero buff would add a +100% success on Intel to really showcase their spy role as well as access to improved ambush being able to get back 60% land
#5 war heroes their a bit overpowered and don't see why they should have a spell book as big or bigger than heretics or mystics should take of pitfalls and fanaticism... That would also showcase fanaticism on avians.
Thx for reading this hope this helps.
re #2 Interesting thought. Weird since Avian/Cleric is traditionally such a synergistic combo that they would double stack GP on it. Perhaps instead of cleric getting GP, give them +5% DME, so it stacks on top of MP/GP, giving avian a bit more tankiness (which is evident that they wanted by increasing the defensive value of their elite).Quote:
Originally Posted by merphalas
saw it, but that's been going this direction for a while now so *shrug* nothing we can do about it. I have said many times in the past that land bonus for war wins only punishes kingdoms that do not land drop, for all others it simply means they need to drop land more and faster. Land bonus has the opposite effect of what they think/claim it does. It increases land drops and land for gold/honor deals.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmiedema
No amount of eowcf can prevent being vultured after war by kingdoms that sit and grow and pump all age.
Forcing growth on a kingdom that comes out of stress situation and has to already fix their provinces adds insult to injury.
Easier to uphold 20 players then 25. Big reason Why you see more off them.
Id rather have 40 player KDs so everyone that wants to play for me could actually get a spot.
one thing that could be done is reduce the significance of numerical superiority. or sumfin!
Also dont know whats harsh about growing then losing size for warKDs. they got many things at their disposal to deal with it.
1. Diplo.
2. Eat wave then CF.
3. Agree landdrop.
4. Let friendly KDs raze u down before eow cf ends.
5. Threaten with FSU to get cfs, and sign non-compete for land
is it me or has no one said anything about 9/0 UD's at OOP going to rape everything? Lets just ignore the 15/1 leet as that has been discussed.... how about them 40-50K offence UD's out of protection... I'm liking barts suggestions even more.
I think the main issue with it is that it is further enforcing the "gain lots of honour then let the big kingdoms take it from you" issue we had this age.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart of Sparta
From what I could see initially it looks like the new owners want to have Honour crown more of a warring kingdom crown, but with this change, I think we will likely just see top whoring kd's be top honour kingdoms again.
It's literally going to be a race of the whoring kingdoms to try and get hostile to a kd that just exited eowcf to farm them out. Whoever can attack faster and get hostile to a kd to claim "hostile with X:X" the most times will likely win land crown.
Just warring kingdom whack-a-mole, taking their honour while they're at it.
That is better than the avian 100% 11/4 leet army how?Quote:
Originally Posted by Slayerviper
You seem to think 11/4 elites without horses is great. Offense is a lot worse compared to human/undead/orc.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmiedema
as mentioned throw in horses and once a UD hits once it will have 15/1 leets with horses so yah... Avian can only train so much leets oop... and they have - gains so yah.... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by jmiedema