Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 56

Thread: Utopia > Evolved or overly repaired?

  1. #1
    Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    375

    Utopia > Evolved or overly repaired?

    So I seem to see a theme amongst people of the past vs people of the present.

    A few people who prefer the old utopia think too much has been done to the game and its not as enjoyable as it once was.

    Some of the current players think its a case of old players being unable to adapt and the game is in pretty good condition.

    I am in the first group.
    Lets think about this..

    We have a game that resets roughly every 3 months and has been going on for what.. 10 years?
    Every age mainly 3 things are addressed..
    1) Add new things
    (got to keep the players interested)
    2) Rebalance the game
    (problems from the new things added the previous age)
    3) Modernize the game
    (listen to player suggestions on how to improve the game)

    So you start out with a product that within a couple of years became extremely popular but after 8 more years of changing it constantly doesn't it stand to reason it has just become a big mess?

    I think its time we begin to think about looking at things from a different perspective.

    Maybe we can convince OMAC to turn Genesis into a retro server? Lets see which game people will flock to, the current product (that has been repaired to death) or the game as it was 7-9 years ago (flaws and all)

    What do you think?
    “Be Who You Are and Say What You Feel Because Those Who Mind Don't Matter and Those Who Matter Don't Mind.”

  2. #2
    Sir Postalot
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,130
    There have been a lot of changes, for sure, but the land-gain formula is the only change that has really had a significant effect. Fix that one thing to the way it was in say ages 3-5 and the game would change dramatically for the better. Every complaint that people have about the game now stems from the landgain formula change, from fake warring, to ghettos just getting pounded.

    As crazy as this sounds, if they just deleted all kingdom aid, then a province could theoretically join for the first time and be the #1 province within an age or two. that's what they need to do if they want to attract players. Plus with deleted aid you could uncap the explore pool again and get the acres flowing again. Might have to eliminate rob the vaults to make the game really aid proof.

    Make those two changes, and you could market this game on a facebook type medium and your chances of keeping those players who do join interested would increase exponentially.

  3. #3
    Needs to get out more VT2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    10,880
    Worst plan ever, beating even vines.

    REJECTED.
    Catwalk's crusade for legalized cheating was a stunning success, with ghettos and low-tiered teams everywhere losing their wells of knowledge to better kingdoms in the process.

    Step one: replace everything that works.
    Step two: blame the predictable epic fail on outside forces.
    Step three: keep the community informed that no progress has been made since the last update.
    Step four: thank you for your patience.

  4. #4
    Sir Postalot
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,130
    Quote Originally Posted by VT2 View Post
    Worst plan ever, beating even vines.

    REJECTED.
    I value your experience and ability to compare the rule changes between various eras and understand their effects through time. This input was well received.

  5. #5
    Enthusiast UtopiaOfGreed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by flogger View Post
    I value your experience and ability to compare the rule changes between various eras and understand their effects through time. This input was well received.
    Thinking the exact same thing.

    This is the best idea anyones suggested - turning Genesis retro. I'd love to play back when the gains system actually made it where if you suicided, your som got posted in the forums for your entire kingdom to hit. Now it is so commonplace that no one cares...

    Edit: Also, removing aid, in theory, would be a great idea. A chained province would have a very hard time getting back on it's feet though. And if you made it only during war, you would see even more fake wars... So practically, this is probably a bad idea.
    Last edited by UtopiaOfGreed; 18-07-2009 at 22:52.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    49
    I for one would be the first to sign up to a retro style game. I'd play both probably, but this way I could get the best of both worlds.

  7. #7
    Sir Postalot
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,130
    Quote Originally Posted by UtopiaOfGreed View Post
    Thinking the exact same thing.

    This is the best idea anyones suggested - turning Genesis retro. I'd love to play back when the gains system actually made it where if you suicided, your som got posted in the forums for your entire kingdom to hit. Now it is so commonplace that no one cares...

    Edit: Also, removing aid, in theory, would be a great idea. A chained province would have a very hard time getting back on it's feet though. And if you made it only during war, you would see even more fake wars... So practically, this is probably a bad idea.
    Chaining wasn't really an issue back then because
    1) attack times were about 20h. When everyone's gaining 10% of their land per hit attack times can afford to be longer. Longer attack times = less provinces can be chained during a 48h war. If someone wanted to chain me back then, all that meant was my kingdom would assuredly end up with more acres and win the war.

    2) Change to the old gains system and provinces will revert back to double the defense compared to their offense. Back then, everyone ran say 80 dpa/50 opa, now its reversed. Offensive power per kd would decrease drastically, decreasing the chaining possible, and more provinces will be able to have troops out and still be unbreakable. What fun is it to have all these provinces that if they hit you you can hit them right back. Trading acres sucks.

    3) With the longer attack times, the amount of provinces a kd could possibly chain would be greatly reduced. With #2, provinces can no longer double tap. All this adds up to it not being strategically wise to ever chain someone, as you'll lose acres if the other kingdom does 3 rounds of max hits while you try to chain say 4 provinces.

    Chaining wasn't a viable strategy back then, that's why it didn't happen. Newer players tend to think the game and strategies "evolved" to a superior strategy. the only thing that has changed is WHAT was the superior strategy.


    Essentially, the whole concept of chaining is bad. The age is too long and no one likes playing a 200 acre province. Getting chained leads to players leaving the game. Fixing GBP isn't the answer, fixing the strategy of the game such that a kingdom wouldn't WANT to chain another province is. The only time people got chained was if there was a real vendetta and you did something really bad. It was fun being gangbanged because odds are you did something fun to earn it.

    The sheer destruction of the chaining and offense and the fact that a smaller kingdom has zero shot at beating a larger kingdom is also what leads to all the fake wars. Fake wars mean people sit and do nothing for weeks at a time just trying to avoid a kingdom hitting them. This is boring and drives out players as well.

    You could go from eliminating aid to trying to do something like messing with the trade balance, or only allowing aid to smaller provinces, etc. but all that becomes exploitable eventually. the aid elimination issue is one that need much more consideration.
    Last edited by flogger; 18-07-2009 at 23:31.

  8. #8
    Sir Postalot
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,036
    until there becomes an option to take a prov out of a war, without making them 200 ood acres, that is the way the game will stay =)
    (either that or raze gets removed...)
    Deliverance -> secrets -> anzac -> mercy -> rage -> "ghetto"

  9. #9
    Sir Postalot
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,130
    Quote Originally Posted by _greenie View Post
    until there becomes an option to take a prov out of a war, without making them 200 ood acres, that is the way the game will stay =)
    (either that or raze gets removed...)
    Well now people take provinces down to 200 acres because that wins wars. With the old landgains/attack times taking a province down to 200 acres would cause you to lose wars. That alone will stop people getting down to 200 acres.

  10. #10
    Enthusiast SoShaan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    416
    Quote Originally Posted by flogger View Post
    With the old landgains/attack times taking a province down to 200 acres would cause you to lose wars. That alone will stop people getting down to 200 acres.
    YES!! agreed!.. The removal of NW based return times in war was a HUGE step backwards. When I learned to play, nobody worried about that one over sized player that some groups keep. Because it was too big to do anything.

    Then all of a sudden, those cows are quad tapping players and returning at the same rate of the rest of us.

    Don't say it... "Their gains are limited" Yeah, but limited * 4 is tough to deal with. Especially is their is no chance of hitting back.

    Also, make KD NW diff mean something again. Now days, hitting into KD twice or half your KD size has little effect.

    Hitting someone 50% smaller than yourself should keep you out so long, cause so many of your troops to die, limit free credits, limit peasants settled. That you would never even think of doing such a hit.

  11. #11
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    265
    flogger, back in the day wasnt all that pretty either, you could get killed easily since there wasnt any GB protection in war as OOW. kds could double to triple hostile declare and alliances were much much more important. that could be a good thing or bad thing depending what type of environment you like. Dragons were different too. one thing uve got to realise is that very active and intense social, political and military content are actually very fun and what makes game live up to its full: by using every possible trait to its limits. also remember that the hardcore players is what made this game alive for that long too. whether by being one or looking up to be one. everyone likes that.

    chaining is wrong? this what makes startegy all important. if you cant get your feet back up afterwards then its your problem. it is very easy to get up and thats where aid is also important. remember that chaining a province and sending aid is FAR from being risk free. it is up to you to calculate those. without aid or chaining, what use is to have a kd, then ull have (a bit like back in the day) provinces all looking for themselves, super explorers taking over kds to join alliances etc..ur ideas are just making the game lazier.

    also dont forget that this high level of intensity and aid is what actually made people grow so close to one another. all those stories were certainly not made up on the basis of 20h attacks. ( u also forgot to mentioned that it was also due to boat uses, T/Ms back then were also EXTREMLY POWERFUL, so attacks werent the only option to be a pain 24/7)
    ppl could get as pissed from a TM than a huge chain.

    but i dont think a lot of people will disagree with you about the gain formula. nwth based gains was supposed to prevent bottom feeding at a province level, then top feeding gain on that nwth basis was introduced to help bottom guys to fight back at a kd level, then mehul realised it was a huge mess and that it lowered severly the level of play as people stayed really in tight clusters being afraid of being big, so then he removed that top feeding aspect in war. all of that is crap. i dont like changing mechanics and maths to help the weak. I like finding alternatives and solutions from practical standpoints. using what the game offers against ur enemies.
    Last edited by Lordwarallied; 19-07-2009 at 03:13.

  12. #12
    Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    375
    Rather than argue about which way is better it would be ideal if we had a choice of which one we preferred. All the argueing then would be academic.

    I honestly believe, given a choice of the 2 games (modern vs classic) that the classic version would prevail.

    And I am not saying introduce a classic version and leave it as is.. you could still make changes but go in a different direction, use alternative solutions. I think a lot of people would agree we don't like the current path, we may agree for different reasons but we still agree.
    “Be Who You Are and Say What You Feel Because Those Who Mind Don't Matter and Those Who Matter Don't Mind.”

  13. #13
    Sir Postalot
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,130
    Quote Originally Posted by Lordwarallied View Post
    flogger, back in the day wasnt all that pretty either, you could get killed easily since there wasnt any GB protection in war as OOW. kds could double to triple hostile declare and alliances were much much more important. that could be a good thing or bad thing depending what type of environment you like. Dragons were different too. one thing uve got to realise is that very active and intense social, political and military content are actually very fun and what makes game live up to its full: by using every possible trait to its limits. also remember that the hardcore players is what made this game alive for that long too. whether by being one or looking up to be one. everyone likes that.

    chaining is wrong? this what makes startegy all important. if you cant get your feet back up afterwards then its your problem. it is very easy to get up and thats where aid is also important. remember that chaining a province and sending aid is FAR from being risk free. it is up to you to calculate those. without aid or chaining, what use is to have a kd, then ull have (a bit like back in the day) provinces all looking for themselves, super explorers taking over kds to join alliances etc..ur ideas are just making the game lazier.

    also dont forget that this high level of intensity and aid is what actually made people grow so close to one another. all those stories were certainly not made up on the basis of 20h attacks. ( u also forgot to mentioned that it was also due to boat uses, T/Ms back then were also EXTREMLY POWERFUL, so attacks werent the only option to be a pain 24/7)
    ppl could get as pissed from a TM than a huge chain.

    but i dont think a lot of people will disagree with you about the gain formula. nwth based gains was supposed to prevent bottom feeding at a province level, then top feeding gain on that nwth basis was introduced to help bottom guys to fight back at a kd level, then mehul realised it was a huge mess and that it lowered severly the level of play as people stayed really in tight clusters being afraid of being big, so then he removed that top feeding aspect in war. all of that is crap. i dont like changing mechanics and maths to help the weak. I like finding alternatives and solutions from practical standpoints. using what the game offers against ur enemies.
    Most of what you say is correct, however the game you described, with it flaws, was able to attact more people than it can today.

    If you step back and think of what you would do if you owned this game, and your goal was to get the most amount of players possible, what you would do strategically would to try and simulate a mafia wars type thing over facebook. You'd want existing players to recruit hundreds and thousands of their friends on facebook to join their "alliance". From a player growth standpoint, I think I would think encouraging alliances, as in making it beneficial for people to have more friends, would be good for business.

    While the art of the 1 on 1 war is what the game players in us would want, if we were running a business driven on attracting players, alliances would be a necessary evil to attaining that goal.

    I agree that land size opposed to NW should be the basis on which gains are made, as if two equal land sized provinces are played by 2 different players, and one makes better use of his buildings or economy he should be able to gain over the other province. However, what I think the problem more rests in the fact that the game was one of constant growth by all kingdoms. There was no explore pool cap. If it got added because of the paradise spell, that has always been a stupid spell that made no sense. Wizards shouldn't make land. Eliminate that spell. The superkingdoms gained off the medium stage kingdoms, and the medium stage kingdoms gained on those lower than them. You could hit someone 55-65% of your size and gain 10% of THEIR land. This encouraged growth while also making you want to hit the largest provinces possible.

    Even the ghettos if they got hit by the superkingdoms generally gained acres week after week. This is what people enjoy. Nowadays, the ghettos almost cannot possibly grow. this will not interest new players.


    You cannot have a Sim City growth type game without people growing. People are getting to a certain acreage and staying that way for months at a time. that is not fun for anyone. Growth is fun.

    I happenned to find the fact that people could get double or triple teamed to be fun, but that needs further investigation. When I got double and triple teamed when I first started it inspired me to make more friends so that would never happen again. However, I don't pretend to have the answer on how to prevent, or if preventing that, would be ideal at this point, I'd have to think about it.

    Regarding your comments on thieves, yeah, they were a huge problem back in the day, and I don't suggest that should revert the way it was.

  14. #14
    Sir Postalot
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,036
    there was also no guild wars/WoW/online FPS/MMORPG's/Xbox Live etc 10 years ago...
    Deliverance -> secrets -> anzac -> mercy -> rage -> "ghetto"

  15. #15
    Forum Addict Dolgil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Decatur, IL. USA
    Posts
    1,090
    I much prefer the game as is now than when I played 5 or 6 years ago. If it were still like that, I would not be playing. Land gains like age 3-5? We had that about 2 years ago. Complaints about it were off the scale. Believe me, you do not want to go there. Everyone growing from extreme bottomfeeding? Ummm, no.

    Let me let you in on a truth. The average player gets stuck around 1k acres. That's the way it has been for the 6 years I have been playing. Doesn't matter how the game changes, that's still been true.
    Dolgil Rosethorn
    If it's broke, fix it.
    If it's not, don't.
    If you do not like the results, change your methods.
    Quit making the same old mistakes. Make new ones.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •