Growth kds VS Warring kds

[cRYPT_LORdz]

Hypothetically, if all the top warring kingdoms (ie FS, Rusty, RK etc) decide to go for growth next age, how would they contend with the current top dogs of utopia?

It'll be interesting if they form an alliance and stir things up in the growth game.

[ofgortens]

growth game is entirely different type of game where growth mechanics are tied into it. Most of the top warring kd's do not have the experience in putting up cows to compete with the growth kd's when taking into account growth mechanics.

I have no doubt they have the activity needed to compete against the best kd's... but just a different type of game with growth kds. (this is coming from someone in one of those warring kds)

Also, I'm pretty sure all those warring kd's like staying away from the drama queens that tend to run around up top.

[American Badass]

It would be exciting but IMO would take them an age or 2 to adjust to whoring / CF / the difference in top play and KD set up. That being said it would be good and should be encouraged by players such as Elit/Proteus/Godly etc and when they lose do not flame them or accuse them of farming out.

Any more competition would be good IMO and I am sure they'd put up decent fights and even beat most top kds as they did with Simians/Havoc etc. They definately have the activity from core members to compete.

If anything it would be good if the current top kds split there leaderships up and they went to these kds to help them out. This way we could see if Proteus could crown with FS/rusty or RK.

[cRYPT_LORdz]

The game currently is split into so many tiers (growth, 25 man war, <25man war, ghettos), and with a slowly dwindling player base, I would love to see the game evolve to where it is just a single giant arena where all kingdoms are competing for the same objective.

Wouldn't a simple fix be taking away kingdom honor bonus from a war win? This way it'll force all the current top war kingdoms to grow big after successive wins and eventually they'll be contending the growth crown with the big boys.

Would love Bishop's take on this.

[MrCurious]

It would be epic and good for the game if more kds grew. The problem is, or rather i dont know if it is a problem, that some of the warring kds dont always fight tough, close wars, which more often then not is what happens in top play. When you utterly farm a ghetto you basically chill in war, but if you had to compete in top, you would have to prep+fight kds with equal or better skill which takes alot more effort and energy from the kd + leadership. Its safe to say the burnout rate would be higher - but then some kds might know the value of getting some strategic CFs in place, for the sole purpose of getting a breather + readjust the kd acre distribution. Right now CFs are being frowned upon, but i think thats more a issue of not understanding their purpose then anything else.

[Anri]

We tried honor, warring, t10 and most things you can try in this game thru all ages in utopia and nothing is as tuff as competing towards t5 and better. This is where you will see the best KDs and the most organized KDs that master every aspect of this game. Warring KDs that have yet not tried it and think they can do it should be welcome up there to see if they got what it takes. Just watch out so that you dont burn out, age after age with all the competition and endless of diplomacy can take the best out of anyone. For longlivity of a KD i dont recommend playing only in one kind of way forever. Some kds is known to never really change setup and never tend to go for any other goals and always beat on lesser good kds etc etc. You dont want to be one of them. I think its time for a few to at least try to step it up into t10. Lets see, Pyromaniacs, freekstyle and maybe some other. Its a different kind of warring and it takes time to adjust to t10 just as it takes time to adjust for warring in mid-range. Its very different styles and i can see why Havoc lost to pyromaniacs, i think in thier own element in t10 earlier in the age they had won. Just like my KD gonna need 1-2 ages to adjust and get the kind of players needed for hardcore warring. Different styles, different mentality, but make no misstake, t10 is normaly where they tuffest and badest kds is. If you dont want to compete you should stay out of t10. If there is some KDs that still compete and call out t10 its time to do what Simians done this age, drop out of t10 and see how good these KDs that for ages avoided t10 really is.

My 5 cents

[Soul_Hunter]

Good comment Anri :)!

[MrCurious]

Good comment Anri :)!

Hey?! What about mine...

[American Badass]

It would be cool if kds could agree to switch between warring and whoring age in age out to keep everyone happy eg growers dont use explore pools to war.

[Heathcliff]

its like a boxer vs MMA fighter in a single arena. i dunno which is which :P

also, t10 is much like politics

[Soul_Hunter]

Hey?! What about mine...

Yours too Mr C :P

[sheeplovebeer]

All the political crap associated with growing is something most KDs can't be bothered to deal with.

[Tadpole]

Hypothetically, if all the top warring kingdoms (ie FS, Rusty, RK etc) decide to go for growth next age, how would they contend with the current top dogs of utopia?

It'll be interesting if they form an alliance and stir things up in the growth game.

They'd contend poorly. Taking away the chance of a fluke crown (always a possibly), war kingdoms won't be able to contend with the whoring kingdoms. Unless they get an influx of experienced bankers and leadership fostered as growth charters.

In a one on one battle on even terms, I'm sure plenty of warring kingdoms would give the current growth kingdoms a good run for their money. They sure have the activity for it, and the experience in dealing with various warring scenarios.

Difference is, for a growth kingdom a war isn't an isolated event, its merely one battle in an age long war for crown. Its so vastly different and comprised of so many more elements than the wave-war-rebuild-wave-war routine of your usual warring kingdom.

The game is growing small, and most of the players are old-timers. And there's growth crown winners in most of the warring kingdoms lineups. They've usually not crowned in a couple of dozen ages though, so they sorely lack recent experience - and the game has changed a lot. Both in terms of mechanics and in terms of mentality and diplomacy.

Or put differently, war kingdoms would need a couple of ages in the top before they could properly compete. But while they gather that experience, they'd also be facing the extremely hostile climate that is the top today. Look at all conflicts in the top the past ages, and imagine throwing in a couple of fresh meat kingdoms in the mix. They'd get ****-played and vultured and ridiculed at every turn. They'd be called a ghetto and be asked to stop try play with the big boys (though playing with the big boys is exactly what they need in order to harness the experience needed to actually compete).

With ages being as long as they are, that'd be months of public humiliation and ridicule, and probably more moments of defeat than of victory. A though sell for many players and kingdoms. The current top of this game has created a very elitist and hostile climate that dissuades a lot of people to get into that tier, and they instead feel content playing at their current level. A more gentleman approach in the top would have been a great service to this game, kept it larger and more competitive. Sadly there's too many egos that needs their daily dosage of stroking for that to happen.

I do applaud those warring kingdoms that do try from time to time though. They're extremely few though, most new contenders are newly formed kingdoms put together by the same old people, shouting the same old insults and accusations at each other.

[mjm334]

As someone currently playing in a warring kingdom, I agree with nearly everything posted above. In addition, I'd like to say that play among growth kingdoms appears to revolve significantly more around positioning then most war kingdoms are accustomed to. While its perfectly acceptable to hit someone 90% your nw in growth wars due to better oow play, many in warring kingdoms might not find that nearly as rewarding as a warring kingdom that waves up into kingdoms 5-10% bigger then themselves. Its a different mentality and a different definition of what one considers a challenge.

As far as some have commented on changing the mechanics to unite the different playstyles, allowing only land gains from warwins does not appear to be a viable strategy. If you look at how small many of the highest ww kingdoms currently are, it suggests many "warring" kingdoms are already comfortable landdropping after war with no land reward. Certainly changing win reward wouldn't decrease the use of landdropping. My personal opinion on combining the two different play styles would involve adding scaling rewards to kingdoms for war wins that would allow them to grow and still be competitive with growth kingdoms that have pumped sci all age rather then war. Just my two cents.

[likethesilver]

last age I proposed making the war rewards into both land an honor instead of just one. It didn't garner much support, but would solve this issue, at least partially.