Printable View
OK, so in war, 148 scientists on a chained province 40% my NW. 0% universities. I do an abduct and get 0.
I know I was taking a cheap shot and all that, but really? ZERO?!?!?
What the hell devs? Utopia is supposed to be a cruel game. If we can't strip out chained provs, then that is major leverage to ending wars that is removed.
Please fix this.
Would this not end up with fake abduct wars? Apparently people are already abusing the current system why would we make it easier in war?
I know abducts in war are already nerfed slightly, add that to the fact that abducts have been nerfed this age too so they prob stacked up and you got zero!
40% of your nw.... hit in range if you want to abduct
Dude, it I said war. Should we only hit in range in war. Get a clue!
Abducting an already chained province is kind of a douchey move. Leave it as it is. It's already hard enough to recover from a chain when you lose a war, imagine losing half your scientists?
It's not "douchey" it's a win condition.
Would you prefer the only thing to do when a province hits landdef is go for a PK?
If science could be lost in a war due to poor play, then poor play could lead to more surrenders and quicker. With few things to lose it's hard to pressure a surrender and by extension hard to earn a win.
It could be good for gameplay if done properly.
Exactly
@Sheister - yes, if you want good gains from abducts you should hit in range in war.
I agree with LuckySports. There's no need to make mechanics so you can get easy science by feeding on people you chained.
I did not say good. I said zero is BS.
This is why utopia sucks now, too many people coddling each other leading to dragging hopeless wars. You need to make it hurt so people leave.
So, genius, I am UB and their entire kd is out of range. Should I just swap to Econ build and pump the rest of the war so it is fair? Pansies like you disgust me (in rye utopia sense). If you don't want you province wrecked, withdraw.
Swap to econ build and aid your other guys until they are all UB. Thats what we do when we have obviously won a war, but they won't withdraw. Once to we got to about half our folks UB and able to attack their biggest guys, they withdrew.
why? Why should I be forced into the strategy that their bunny hugging world likes? That is stupid. If I can gain land in a TM in war, I should be able to gain min 1 scientist per abduct in war. If the little chains whine enough, they will drive their own kingdoms out of war by wearing down their monarchs. That is as it should be.
The whining children have really screwed this game up with watering down and coddling away everything that makes the game great. The cruelty is what makes it a challenge and makes it great.
As you have noted, you can TM for gains. If you want good abducts (or even any abduct gains on someone who has only 148 scientists to begin with), then don't set provs up to outgrow the kd/opponent.
Why did you want to become UB? Presumably for the economy benefit / to secure land? So goal achieved. If that wasn't your goal you could play your war differently.
You are complaining about people who made the game easy and yet you want to be able to easily get abducts on people much smaller?
I know I am wrong but it sure sounds like u are whining.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
No, I grew to become UB from the sheer fact that they are dragging the war. Doing things to strip out their provinces will make them end the obviously unwinnable war. All I can think is you are one of the miserable kids who just wants protections from everything in this game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris121
I guess it could be fair to say that. Honestly though, I just think there should be a means to make staying in unwinnable wars painful enough to not have to play to the 50% mark. Stripping out provs is one way to drop their NW more to get to 50% faster or to force enough pain for them to WD. If the outcome were at all in doubt, this is a non-issue. No one is learning in competitive wars.Quote:
Originally Posted by nickey
I think increasing abducts in war to the point where they will effectively make people want to WD, will lead to a mass exodus of a big percentage of the remaining player base.
Min 1 scientist per abduct would make people quit?
Shut it down now then.
If you had no purpose for becoming UB, perhaps it would have been better to plan your strategy differently so you didn't become so comparatively big. Then you wouldn't need to be asking for mechanics changes to make it easier for you to win a war.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Read what you wrote.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris121
You are clearly ridiculous.
You aren't listening to anyone, from your point of view, only you are right, and everyone that disagrees with you is wrong. If you really hate this game so much, just quit, don't force mechanic changes that makes everyone else want to quit too. That, or chill. Change is a natural part of life, good or bad, it'll happen.
I can see the interest in having more viable attack types in war, it does have reduced kills nowadays, perhaps that could be enhanced further for war purposes, something along these lines. I would tend to agree that 0 seems a bit harsh.
some ppl are really annoyed when they dont get gains from abducts directly OOP, didnt bother me before they buffed the gains a bit- i had no problem waiting a couple days for it to be viable to get at least one at the start of the age. Now i think its quite easy to get 1 off someone OOP, so long as they aren't sage or started with some sort of sweet uni build... what im getting at is that those ppl would also be happy if, for example a hard minimum of 1 scientist on abducts (so long as target has >0) were implemented.
im sure a lot of people would think that such a mech could result in bottom feeding or something of this nature... i dunno.
Being stubborn is not a crime. If he thinks he is right he is justified in sticking by his position. Maybe he's being a bit mean. Just a bit though.Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckySports
We (in favour of more abducts in war) are merely in favour of more gameplay variety, more ways to win wars, more ways to outplay your opponent rather than being "forced" to only war opponents you have a clear advantage against (aren't you tired of complaints related to this?).
Prove us wrong somehow, don't just say that we argue too aggressively and therefore our points are bad.
Utopia, when it is at its best, is a mean game. To have something you work two or more weeks to pump and prep and make as good as can be come crashing down within 10 minutes or less upon war declare is mean. It hurts. It sucks. It makes you grouchy.
But then when you overcome that and grow back it makes it so much sweeter.
I remember when I was so livid when my little war ghetto I was leading was being fed on by BiO after they were the defending crown kingdom and how unfair it was and boo hoo hoo. I got the CF, I railed and guilted and cajoled and was a damned nuisance until I got it. Then I made a vow we would come back for them. We sought out good strong targets to grow on. We worked and worked until the time was right and then we waved on them and it dragged into an epic 6 week long war which we won! That war was the most rewarding revenge I have ever had in this game. It was so awesome!
THAT is what makes this game good.
Not coddling people because it is just so hard to recover after a chain. Not making it easier. It is provide incentive for people to know when they are beaten to give up, and encouraging them to seek other pathways for revenge. This is a game that at its best is steeped in the cruelty of seeing everything you cherish about your province reduced to ashes, only to rise again because you are determined to win!
Not whatever it has become now...
So now, I don't think you are right. I don't think we need a kinder utopia. I don't think losing min 1 scientist on an abduct is cruel. I don't think that making consequences in this game less harsh makes it better.
I think it feeds into the spineless chicken-shhh stuff that has seen the player base dwindle away to this shell that it is now.
More game play variety is fine as a goal, but as far as I've seen, noone has explained why you need a min abduct of 1 to be able to have variety or why feel that there is no variety now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolzly
From my view, min 1 per abduct plays towards the current favoured strategy of chaining people down to land def, so far from adding variety it is just making the current strategy more attractive.
Sheister seems to think that by not having a min of 1 we are making the game easy. But to me it's the opposite - he is asking to make it easier to persuade a KD to WD. There are already ways to do that with a more diverse approach.
Good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris121
You're really suggesting that it's poor play for someone to have the offense in their kd and then get chained/farmed as a result? The best attacker in all of Utopia will still get chained if they have anywhere near the highest offense in their kd. Poor play has nothing to do with whether or not a kd can chain someone and then farm them for science. The current science system is very unforgiving for losing scientists, so allowing a province to lose science in war is a terrible idea. I understand you want a win condition, but this is not the answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolzly
I think the main argument is that sometimes KDs don't know when they are beat, or refuse to give up 'just because'... The 50% NW thing is fine, but 7 days minimum could be a bit of a slog in some situations. If there were at least some gains involved in the hits, it could make it a good way of helping people understand that it is time to pack it up. If a KD can afford to even be trying such a hit on your KD, I am thinking the situation must be dire.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris121
This could even allow these shelled provinces to start to take on more acres during end phase war, since KDs wouldn't be forced to continue taking land when they feel they need to get 'something' in return for making a hit, in a war they have already won. So now they don't have to start their WD-CF period at 400 acres while rest of KD is over 1k.
I don't see how making it easier to persuade a KD to WD is an issue. Its a judgement call, if you get it wrong running abducts could ruin you. Same for a KD on when to WD, its a judgement call whether to stay in and try to pull it out, risking putting yourself in a position to be abducted potentially, or to get out while the getting is good. If its before mintime and the other KD already feels they can afford to abduct, it must be bad and theyve earned it, whether it was in their attacks, or just in getting you to war them in the first place. Along with those situations where a KD wants to force mintime 'just because' ... well ok, but we are going to take a weeks worth of abducts from you, because we can.
I'm not sure that is true. Once you have people on land def (eg 18-24 hours into war?) wouldn't you just have t/ms abduct x3 or 4?Quote:
Originally Posted by RattleHead
Several of the posts make it sound like it's hugely difficult to find a strategy that lets you make abducts on people smaller than you in war, but it's not.
Its not true at all, as soon as you have a province on land defense everyone can send leftovers on the land def target and get up to 2 to 3 scientists. I'm sure many will rage quit over this.
My kingdom will survive, however; so I am not worried about that.
I don't think "1 min scientist per abduct" is the answer (even if it were "only in war" or something). Artificial hard-caps are bad imo.
I also don't think that nw-range or GBP should stop applying.
As for "You're really suggesting that it's poor play for someone to have the offense in their kd and then get chained/farmed as a result?"
No, that's inevitable - but it's poor play to allow yourself to hit landdef afterwards. It's not easy to maintain a usable amount of military after being chained, and rightfully so because it takes a lot of the enemy kingdom's damage potential to effectively chain someone. The enemy wants you to release some offense, but many don't because they know that there's not a whole lot of bad things that can happen as a result. The risk/reward of going to landdef has too few risks. You can shrug off the T/M 4x's and just keep fighting the war.
It's just risk/reward relating to landdef that I have issue with. I see the abduct attack as a potential avenue to find a fix for that risk/reward imbalance.
I think that land&nw-based gains have something to do with this as well.
If thats the case then both KDs could be scraping each others land def provs for sci, could they not? seems fair enough to me. The point, for me at least, would not be to work the odd abducts in like you are suggesting, although I suppose it makes sense. To me, it would seem to offer a means for the better KD to extract some extra war win bonus. Its not that difficult to come up with a strategy that would let you abduct smaller provinces in war, it is moreso to come up with one that lets you abduct people in proper range, though it can be done as well.
If its a hard floor of one, but still beholden to all the relative NW/land factors to get any further gains, I find it hard to believe this would be an issue. For real gains you would still need to hit in range, but if that is what we want to see then the kills modifier probably has to go, otherwise it has no use in war other than vs land def, or if the war is over before mintime.
I agree with you on these parts. I think a min 1 abduct is too blunt to try to fix it, but I would like to see the risk / reward of running land def adjusted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolzly
Yes, both KDs would be doing it but to different provs (ie KD wide the gains would net off, but on a province basis they wouldn't). Some provs gain, some would lose. I can see an argument that that isn't a bad outcome for other reasons (that it probably boosts t/m and hybrid science at a cost to the pure attackers) but to me there are better ways to achieve that result if it is intended. I don't see that it achieves what you are hoping for - ie a mechanism for the BETTER kd to get something additional from war - because with a min gain of 1 you only need 1 land def prov and then everyone can hit that one (ie it is not the case that the KD who creates 5 land def provs will be able to make more abducts than one who creates 1, aside perhaps from the direct effect of it being 20 non land provs versus 24 which already exists).Quote:
Originally Posted by RattleHead
I would be fine removing the -50% kills on abducts during war. Then it becomes (if it is not already) viable to hit in range to gain science, without the need for this artificial min gain mechanic.
So why is 10 acres on a chained province better than losing 1 scientist? You all think scientists are sacred or something. That is why you should be able to still lose them. Then you would not sit in wars that you can't win forever.
Its fine, I will simply go back to PKing provinces like the old days and razing into wars of kingdoms that drag too much to PK them when I have nothing better to do.