Printable View
No Rituals
Permanent +15% increase in war casualties (NS and Attacks)
"Restlessness" KD Bonus, For every uto-day not in war KD Income/Draftees/Rune Production/Wiz and Sci Generation reduces 0.2% from 150% of normal (ie eowcf starts at 150% bonus - and decreases by 4.8% daily - meaning after 10 days post-war the kd will be below the 100%, thus incentivising war, also allows to recuperate faster) (edited)
during war = 100%
the 150% bonus cap can be increased by war wins and war duration.
Uhm no thanks, disincentivizing peace is not the same as incentivizing war. You shouldn't punish people for not warring, that's just stupid.
I'm sure you can go play Farmville instead if that's your thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elldallan
Utopian Guide : "WELCOME TO UTOPIA, A WORLD LIKE NO OTHER FULL OF WAR, INTRIGUE, STRATEGY, AND DIPLOMACY!" - doesn't suggest its full of peace now does it.....
Makes warring easier, makes crowning harder and kickstarts competition.
Unlike logging in every day, declining ever war just so you can pump and explore and harvest your next crop, that's just stupid.
If all you want is conflict without thought then go back to playing Call of Duty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gigglebits
This suggestion doesn't accomplish anything, it just punishes people for not playing the game exactly how you and the OP. It would punish strategy, intrigue and diplomacy just so you can have endless war.
Your retort lacks imagination, as does your analysis on what this suggestion achieves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elldallan
It encourages strategy, it encourages better diplomacy and punishes the farms that exist without purpose. It also promotes 22 and 25man kds rather than plethora of ghettos that exist for no other purpose than to be leeched upon.
If you are arguing that it is unfair to penalise the players that log in once daily, in a kd that never wars, to explore/dice and exist as a land/resource farm for the more active players, by all means, but they are not the core player base that are buying credits or providing revenue on a frequent basis.
No I'm arguing for the players and kingdoms that wants to war on their own terms if and when they feel that they are ready for it and doesn't want to be forced to war because of some arbitrary and completely asinine game mechanic. and I think that they represents a substantial majority of the player base, perhaps a minority(but a vary substantial minority) of the paying players but like in all "freemium" games the unpaying player is what makes the whole game possible because the paying players need something to fight against and if you sh*t too much on them they're just going to leave and then the game will die.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gigglebits
Your way of playing the game is not the only way of playing the game and like it does right now the game should continue to cater to all ways of playing the game.
Utopia is not a war game, it's a strategy game. You can win the age without lots of wars.
Instead of trying to make it easier to pump after a War, it just needs to be so damn difficultin the first place that no one ever expects to be fully pumped, and thus accepts that they can/must war outside of their 'optimal' conditions.
That will only move the "optimal" conditions, it won't change the fact that there will be an optimal condition. It will still be beneficial and preferable to be as pumped as you can reasonably be, and thus people will strive for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by RattleHead
+1, Wars are not the only legitimate way of playing this game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paradise
Believe it or not, there is such a thing as pre-war strategy. Penalizing people for playing the pre-war game is stupid.
Kingdoms always try to be fully pumped before war so making it difficult does not help. It's actually the opposite, pumping should be made easier!Quote:
Originally Posted by RattleHead
"fully pumped" is a relative term. Most KDs like to get 'fully pumped', sure... then they sit around and whine because they can't convince anyone to War them.
If it were more difficult to get that 100% Elite army there would be, and people would see, value in the use of Specialist armies. Eventually people would get comfortable with going to war with spec-armies, especially if they see most other KDs are in the same scenario. You need to compare yourself to potential enemies, not to your ideal self, in order to gauge your 'pumped'ness
Making things easier makes things less competitive, no matter how you slice it.
If it's harder to get a full elite army, then people will just sit back until they get a full elite army. The problem is that an elite is always better han a specialist troop in defending/attacking. Tweak elites so that it is never a good idea to go full elites. Maybe elites add +h to attack times or elites increases the vulnerability to catch plague/riots/greed/whatever?
I feel like a wages penalty seems like it makes the most sense for that kind of tweak, in terms of RP and potential effect.
It could use a similar calc to UD conversions, where it compares what % of your offence is made of Elites, and throttles your spec conversions accordingly. I'm not really sure how that calculation works, but it is something that exists already in the game which works with the two variables necessary.
Instead, once you reach a number, something like 2/3 offensive units are elites you start to gain a wages 'buff' and as you increase from 2/3 elites to 100% the buff goes from 0-XX%
... Since penalizing TMs who use Elite units for defence would be a bit rough, you would have to say that any Elite with Defence greater than Offence would likely need to be exempt from this calculation.
Elites would still be a base 0.7gc/tick to Specs 0.5gc, but this 'buff' would affect all wages.
That is still stagnating the game though as people will quickly figure out the optimal combo of ospecs vs elites, and whether banks are worth having in war just so that you can support elite armies.
What we want is to have a choice between specs, elites and a combination of them, and they're all equally viable options depending on what we are trying to achieve. Hence my suggestion above of adding attack time to elite armies. So you can either have fast cheap units or expensive strong but slow units. Depending on your role in war, you might choose one or the other.
very true, im sure teh devs could make a bit more mysterious than how i laid it out, but youre right, people would soon find the sweet spot, or just manage to afford the elites anyways.
as for the attack times, thats a difficult mechanic to work out, how predictable will my attack times be under a system like that?
EDIT: ill just add this shameless plug for my dragon suggestion from awhile back http://forums.utopia-game.com/showth...Dragons-abound!
this could encourage people to keep standing armies of Ospecs for Attackers, and Dspecs for TMs, as Dragon fodder.
So far away from the thread title at this point, but...
What if having Specs in your army spared your Elites from losses entire they were wiped out of your force? At first I thought maybe just have the Specs take maybe half the losses directly themselves, and then share the second half with elites... but based on 5% losses on attack, this would take less than 1 ospec/acre to max out the benefit, and wouldn't have a significant effect on people's training regimens.
So, if we had Specs just eat all the losses until they were dead, it would greatly increase their utility. I am thinking having 20% of your force as specs (2-3 ospec/acre?) in this scenario would buy you 4 hits without taking any elite losses, not withstanding the potential for Night Strike, etc but also not counting the spec credits you get as you attack.
Same as previously, everyone would find their sweet spot and it would still be a race to get to that spot and wait for everyone else, but having that much less to train would tend to speed things up for everyone I would think.
I still would get a full elite army. There is no inherent disadvantage of having a full elite army, even if they get NSed, as ospecs still suffer more losses anyway. I reckon elites and specs should serve different purposes in battle, not one is inherently better. Imagine cavalry vs archers vs spears. We need them all, even though cavalry definitely has more maintenance cost.
It would be cool is different races have different abilities for elites.
Humans (knights) get - attack time or stronger horses but cannot march unless you have at least 150% wages.
Faeries (beastmasters) can use horses for defense but cannot attack/defend without horses.
Dryads (will o wisps) pacify enemy troops (removes them from combat before the battle takes place), but dont attack themselves.
Etc.
But maybe it's a bit too much.
That's hardly surprising given that the thread went offtopic directly from the first post. The OP mentioned rituals once and then segwayed into something completely different.Quote:
Originally Posted by RattleHead
I like that you're trying to come up with something new, my main beef with it is that it'll get even harder to diminish people's off which is already pretty much impossible unless you can overpop them badly just before armies gets home.Quote:
Originally Posted by RattleHead
Personally I think it should be much much easier to affect the off of attackers.
Good point. I would like to see an ops similar to BG/PF which kills offense on every attack made on the target province.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elldallan
You can do that, you just have to attack them when their Offence is at home, assuming it isn't made of OSpecs.
http://forums.utopia-game.com/showth...37569-Pitfalls