Printable View
You want utopia to go places, remove networth from the game. Acres only. The game is and has always been about acres. Remove networth as a metric from all calculations, kingdom page, province pages, internal stats, all gains formulas, etc. The game instantly becomes simpler and more competitive.
What!? I've won wars solely because of NW. Acres are basically only a measure of potential where Networth is a measure of actually power. And removing Networth makes balancing the game more difficult. There is a reason and rational for why elites have different NW values.
This is a facially absurd suggestion. You would have to drastically overhaul racial balancing, and probably eliminate half the rest of the game.
Terrible idea. What they should do is return to NW-based gains.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ovenmitt
Damn I’m agreeing with Steel again
Power is never outwardly visible in reality, especially when we're talking scope of country vs country in a fantasy setting. Networth as a quantifiable metric makes no sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnarok
Networth has no effect on racial balancing, other then to satisfy a networth based gains formula.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andurilas
None of the rest of gameplay uses networth, other then to satisfy gains based formulas. Dragon formula would have to transition to acreage based.
The game has been on land based. It was a huge fail .No need to go back to repeating bad ideas all over again just so land farms can pop up everywhere OOP and make farming people fresh OOW even worse.
nw is fine, nw based gains would be even better. You got to have this factor so it does not just become about who can cram in the most stuff on the least acres, running 70% homes should have its drawbacks as it should never be the go to strategy for the majority of players, that would take the meaning of all other buildings out of the game.
No, we need nwbg back.
Bring back net worth based gains, yes please!
with networth as a nonmetric, cramming isnt relevant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Madchess
sure it is if we use land based gains and you can hold twice the military I have on the same numbers of acres then I can never retal and you win every time.
with nw as a metric I don't care if you can hold twice my miltary on the same acres, you'll never be able to sustain it for long, and since your nw is much higher than mine with twice the military why should I care, I would not be a good target for you anyway.
The fallacy you're holding onto, is that without networth, the only thing that matters is the acres. There is zero incentive to pump a small number of acres when getting more acres is the better deal and easier thing to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Madchess
Wtf? That meme is on par with a fart joke. Let the adults talk.
I think it's an interesting idea tho I have no idea what all the implications would be.
It's a terrible idea and what sort of idiot is going to argue you wouldn't want to pump because there is no more nw?
Why would we want to remove pumping from the game anyway....
5/7 trolling
Can anyone start giving actual evidence or reasons why we should use one or the other? This thread is full of 'yes, no, yes, no!' rather than having any reasons why people take the stance they do.
Wrong. It's everyone yelling Ovenmitt it's a stupid idea and him laying increasingly obvious bait.Quote:
Originally Posted by s0830887