Comments for the second iteration of changes for next round in here please.
Printable View
Comments for the second iteration of changes for next round in here please.
radical indeed... and cannot wait to test the changes for new age :-D!!!
Me likes it - especially the game mechanics not over done this time!!!
WTH? Now humans are more like a TM race.
I like it. Also, glad to see the war bonuses toned down.
LE: Orc might be a bit too hardcore.
Why give ToG to a race with $500 elites?
I'd like to see the auto-win changed so it won't kick in until at least a week has passed to prevent abuse.
For those who do not know what the 'median' is:
Order the list by land size and pick the middle one (or average the 2 middle ones in case of an even number)
Love the war win change. Races look pretty nice, all playable atleast :)
Orc elite unite - 8/2 (not 9/2)
Undead elite unit - 8/3 (not 9/3)
Lower avains elite to 6 NW.
I like these changes, not sure if sage is OP with the 'immune to plague' but this age is going to be interesting. The numbers look fairly solid, but human as t/m might take some time to get used to
If there 's 1 thing that I would like to see, it would be a fix to the honor gains from thief ops in relation to magic, but that's a different subject.
avian elite 7/2........is this a joke???? if its not give them back +1 defence for def specs
Sage lost free books and cheaper books and the learn protection was nerfed a little. Giving them Plague immunity won't make them OPQuote:
Originally Posted by vertigo
Building strong WPA is a lot harder and more time consuming than training TPA. The difference in honor gains reflects this
All is good except Dwarfs - they are seems to be dead. Please give them traditional BE (25%) or allow them to use accelerated construction or since they got stange magic bonus, give them 'no runes requared to cast spells' ability.
Are you kidding me? Dwarf is probably #2 attacker after orc.
I hadn't thought of these things, thx.Quote:
Originally Posted by Landro
"War will end automatically if your opponents networth drops to 50% of yours."
This gives a big advantage to the bigger kingdom. The smaller kingdom need to reduce the NW of the bigger kingdom to its size and then reduce it further.
Why not instead look at the relative ratio of NW at the beginning of the war and say that automatic war win conditions are met if this ratio moves past certain thresholds after a minimum of 1 week of war.
Those thresholds could for instance be asymmetrical with the intent of making war win conditions easier for the smaller kingdom and thus making the odds more even.
This ratio would also make following the war easier as you would look at one number as opposed to daily acres gains adjusted for exploration gains...
Here it would be much simpler.
For example, the ratio was at 125% at the beginning of the war. It is today at 120% which means that the smaller kingdom is actually wining and should it fall to 90% then it would be an automatic war win for the smaller kingdom.
War will end automatically if your opponents networth drops to 50% of yours. This will only occur after a minimum of 7 days of warring.Quote:
Originally Posted by Landro
This is only for edge cases and should not be considered the new way to win wars. I would expect maybe one or 2 wars per age to fulfil the criteria for an auto withdrawal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabuazero
The war wouldn't be over until one is thoroughly beaten. Topfeeding on bigger kingdoms to get to some NW ratio autowin would be a terrible mechanic. You have to beat them down to win, if you can't do that then you aren't really winning yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabuazero
thanks :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bishop
OK the game mechanic changes are good
personalities are OK except sage is now almost useless, cant run extreme without cost reduction might as well remove extreme from the game. Do they even get some free books ???? nerfed to much on that note i could careless about plauge when i can just remove it casting NB.
Cleric is ugly as well do something to boast it up perhaps give it a BE bonus.
Race changes however, are the worst i have ever seen playing this game and i been playing for a very long time.
Humans are basically an old gnome with tog how ugly.
Dwarfs are still to Nerfed take away the credit raze thing and boost its BE nobody cares about free razing it not very important especially in a war. In addition, the food 50% consumption penalty makes having a nice build with it very hard and only 10% BE bonus a horrible set up. The instant spell thing can be taken away make it more like it used to be give it back 7\4 leets so it can have its advantage and compete with orcs and undead's like it used to.
Avians are also to nerfed boost their dspec or give it more defense on the leets or some other bonus.
Leet points are all out of wack you got a bunch races with 10-11 and 12 points and avian being weakest with 9. even them out give a boost to all of them rather then nerf.
or Watch the world be Undead\Orc\Elf and TM's
I think the changes are good, I could play any of these races.
I like the revisions overall, but I think orcs are slightly OP and sage is slightly UP by losing the point cost reduction. I also think humans should have more attack power. They look too much like halflings now.
I assume when it says a war win awards free building credits equal to the total of your current unbuilt acres, that includes the land currently out with armies at war end that returns home immediately?
"-50% Combat Instant Spell Damage and Sabotage Damage" means that an Orc has -50% defensive wpa (this will make orc very weak in war)? Or how does this works?
Avian is too slow now in my opinion considering weak defense of his elite which make him too easy to be ambushed.
Humans should be called gnome.
Moving chastity back to Undead it's not really good. It was fine to go with mystic, I think. Give UD some other spell, maybe WS from Humans or NM from Elf and give to Human/Elf another spell (QF, Vermin)
Also: "+50% Spell Duration" in case of NM will affect the duration of re-training?
Not much of the major changes in the next age are within my flavoured taste, but I am really glad and grateful that the uniques of the races can stay the same at last.
The feeling that the development team gave me from the two changes made, is their determination to make the next age, an age full of spells and ops flying all around in wars lol!! It is quite funny just to imagine how fierce the wars the next age will be, I am sure many will have a taste of surprise from it. The number in percentage does give a great and huge range of benefit but no one would actually know how it become until we test it out, so I do support this revision 2 changes but except for one race, the Elfs.
In overall, Avian may have 40% thievery damage but they lost -10% speed and a -10% gain and also the Clear Sight spell, so it makes them look weaker but after have a look at their elites, 7/2 is not bad as well.
Dwarf is a well defended A/M, with the aid of Clear Sight spells it naturally makes them invulnerable to runes stolen strategy if they add in good amount of WTs. A 30% spell damage given to them naturally encourage the Dwarf players to go for Wpa build and this makes them less vulnerable to chain strategy since a mage can counter chain by Land Lust when they reach a low acre. So here I think the value of the elites should be nerfed a bit or the Avians would seem naturally weaker if compared to the Dwarfs.
Elfs as usual I do not encourage the gift of Nightmare spell for them. Personally I have seen a top kd using Faeries team comes along with their Nightmare strategy, and even with only 3 mana per tick and 5 off spec, they have already owned a lot of kds so easily like a piece of cake.
But the focus of this point is still about the Nightmare spell. If the spell are as strong as before as I recognised it, it is unimaginably scary.
The lost of Clear Sight spells doesn't really make it a penalty because of numbers. I would take an example of this.
If a kd only have a few Elfs naturally just stealing their runes would solve the problem of the fear from Nightmare. But, how are you suppose to counter them when it comes with a kd of Elfs? It doesn't need to be a full kd of Elfs, just half of them Elfs and another half of them a race which have good advantage in thievery damage so they can steal runes effectively to provide to the Elfs. You can't expect to be able to steal every Elfs runes, and with +30% Wpa and 5 mana/tick with Mystic, that makes them unimaginable scary in wars. Except the race Faeries I really dont think any races else will be able to withstand the Elfs in wars.
We have to put in mind too a mage is capable to counter chain strategy as well by Land Lusting.
The roles of Faeries has been enhanced more with having both Wpa Tpa bonus as well as spell/ops damage together. I meant wow, the next age is truely undoubted an age for the thieves and mages.
While Halfling doesn't have much to say since majorities of it uniques stay the same the next age.
Human, this race I believe is a new experimental and tryout for the development team. Giving a bonus in both t/m damages, the population and the elites value give me a feeling they looks like a Hafling but actually they dont, they have tree of gold and fountain of knowledge and they get the War Spoil spell as well. The many ways of this race to be able to play different roles are largely possible.
Orcs losses the penalty of -25% Wpa and Tpa and a better defence in magical area with the gift of Reflect Magic. This makes them less vulnerable from t/m damage. The feeling is to provide this race especially to the pure attackers lovers.
Undeads.... is a lol for the next age. If I am not mistaken, this should be the weakest race among others all.
A -50% offence losses will limit the reach of an amount their elites counts since when your elites grows in numbers, the losses follow greater in numbers but the spec convertion stay the same. So that means your offence will stay the same as well, a cap in offence Opa value. So it doesn't give much benefit in this area. As well as they do not enjoy any t/m offence capability like the Avians or Dwarfs, yet they do not enjoy the benefit of Reflect Magic like the Orcs, so naturally the only benefits I could see from this race, is only their Plague and no food needed.
These are my 2 cents, hope it helps, thanks.
And again, thanks the development team for keeping the uniques of the races for us. :)
-50% damage on their offensive spells/ops, not a WPA/TPA mod. And no, NM is not a duration spell.Quote:
Originally Posted by KipahFromKF
At first glance, these changes just reflect pointlessness of playing hybrid, dw/hu/av/hf are just so fragile, who is AV gonna NS??, AVs will get NSed by fearies and halfers and halfers will be FBed and MSed to death. Feary is the only race with no drawbacks to its role, remove it and the hybrid will rule.
Why can't an Avian A/t NS Orcs and Undeads or an A/m??Quote:
Originally Posted by nickey
If you're right than orc is a little too strong.Quote:
Originally Posted by DHaran
NM it's an instant spell, but the result has a duration component ...
And now I see that UD has NS back ... UD is strong again :D
I like the changes...I like Avian/Warrior (Edit: and be a A/T) but not sure if I'm crazy.
As far as I know the duration is not modded by anything, but it wouldn't be the first time I was wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by KipahFromKF
@Bishop: Any ideea what means "Enhanced Conquest range"? Cause if lets me to cq larger ppl OOW is useless, better switch back to old Enhanced CQ at any time (or only at war) or give some extra OME for the attacker in case of CQ (+5-10% OME when performing a CQ) and let Warrior have no limit for cq OOW
It might be affected by effects that mod training time like IAQuote:
Originally Posted by DHaran
I really like these changes, although I believe halfers are much too weak.
This age they were a bit too weak to begin with and they lost +10% population, perfect intel, quickfeet, and townwatch in favor of +50% TPA and invisibility. This is a nerf to an already weak race.
Wouldn't it be nice if top-feeding replaced bottom-feeding for a while? Maybe smaller kingdoms would actually accept to go to war as opposed to spamming the CF button. Could make the game more interesting and competitive.Quote:
Originally Posted by DHaran
median or mean? it makes a BIG differenceQuote:
Originally Posted by Bishop
Sure they "can", bcuz if enemy has high tpa or >WTs<, what u must do to avoid lets say beeing AWed to death, looses will be huge and tpa efficiency of avian is/will be very low.Quote:
Originally Posted by DHaran
I've been running extreme sci between wars as a rogue this age. It's doable without being sage.Quote:
Originally Posted by dusk
Agreed it makes a big difference, and mean would be preferable to median.Quote:
Originally Posted by Persain
Topfeeding is already stronger than bottomfeeding.... It's a common misconception that big provs hit small provs. A more accurate description is big provs hit BAD provs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabuazero
Avian
+40 damage? An attacker race should not have more of a mod than a T/M race. Fae being 30, this should be max 25%. Reduce Elite cost to 675 if you feel you need to balance that reduction in op bonus.
Dwarf
Looks OK to me.
Elves
600 or 650 gc on the elite unless you are going to give the Quickfeet back. Give them back reflect magic.
Faery
I like it except for the spell book. I think faes should have full spells including MS. If you feel you need to, drop their bonus to +25% on all op parameters for it.
Halflings
Looking good, but give them back aggression too, so spells should be invisibility, town watch and aggression. I also think because of their elite they need a either the small population bonus (5%) or they need the 500 gc elite so they have space for homes.
Humans
I like the idea of the generalist race. I think people are going to shy away from it big time. I would prefer to see a 6/6 elite here for 750 gc with a 6.5 nw.
Orcs
Look good to me.
Undead
I am sad that you all caved to the Undead whiners about food. They have to eat something. I would like to see them have a small pop penalty if you are not going to make them have food. So, I would propose having a -20% sci penalty and a -5% pop penalty (since they keep eating their peasants)if they insist on the food thing.
I like all personalities but the Sage
Sage
needs more sci protection. Restore the -75% losses on learn attacks. Immunity to plague exchanged for the science discount is a MASSIVE NERF to this personality to then further nerf the protection and renerf the science effectiveness bonus is a screw job beyond the pale. So at least give them back the -75% protection. If you insist on taking away the research discount give them back the 30% effectiveness too.
Mechanics
Without knowing the specific chances of increasing the meter and the casualties on bounes I can?t say if the current bounce mechanic is fair or not. If losses are sufficiently nerfed on a bounce attack, then I am OK with this I guess, but I would prefer the simpler bounce = 1 point on the meter.
Good tweaks, I think most everything is fine. I have a hard time seeing how human can compete even with +10% pop, but the concept is fun. An improvement here would probably be good, war hero could also use a small extra. Faeries are more than fine, not giving them MS provides strategic choice (even if the new strong mystic still makes faery a bit too strong overall).
Orc is way too strong. Either tweak that elite value, to 8/2 (which is boring) or give them a proper drawback from having an awsome elite. The TPA/WPA decrease sounded nice. Or just make it a flat 50% WPA decrease. (They have Reflect Magic afterall)
Personalities just seem boring, nothing that really shines. Sages is worthless, same for clerics.
Don't know how you came up with all the numbers, very few of the selected races will actually be decent as it is