Kingdom Size

[Mike^]

Reduce it to 10-12 players.

Ooh and this topic was not for idiots and nubs who dont get it (you to owners)

Its pretty clear, more kingdoms, more fun

(in before abs idiots, no smaller kingdoms wont lack leaders).

Many leaders lurking in the shadows who will lead 10 insted of 25.

Fix your stupid game, whould be done 8 years ago.

[Thunder TA]

Ah. No.would end the game for most

[Mike^]

not at all, so why dont you just **** off.

[PikeBadCompany]

Easy now Mike^ =) I agree that they need to change the game ALOT, the mechanics are way off, and unbalanced..

Also we miss out on many potential players, because they need easier introduction to the game.

[Pillz]

Reduce it to 10-12 players.

Ooh and this topic was not for idiots and nubs who dont get it (you to owners)

Its pretty clear, more kingdoms, more fun

(in before abs idiots, no smaller kingdoms wont lack leaders).

Many leaders lurking in the shadows who will lead 10 insted of 25.

Fix your stupid game, whould be done 8 years ago.

I disagree with the need to lower KD sizes. I think that it'd be more effective to keep them at 25 and initiate a concentrated effort to expand the player base. I also believe that the effects of new tools and the new guide need to be felt on the server at large before the decision to lower KD sizes is made. The #1 issue is that more kingdoms are needed because of the 'individual' failings of kingdoms that adhere to certain 'cultural' norms within the game that naturally decrease competition. More kingdoms made out of primarily the same player base won't resolve the issue. Only multiply the complaints and complicate the issue of how to mediate, through changes, the needs of the different 'tiers', which by now are as forced together as is possible imo.

The goal should be the improvement of existing kds.

[Drys]

Ah. No.would end the game for most

I agree with Thunder. We've got a solid group of 20-22 folks that have been together for quite a few ages. I wouldn't keep playing the game if we got split up...

[Bo To]

More KDs doesn't mean more capable monarchs to lead them...

[Thunder TA]

I guess the game is going to end soon, Steel and i actually agree on something after all these years.Either that or lightning is about to strike us.

[Wolzly]

Think of it first.

Picture the worst ghetto you've ever played in.

Now split that ghetto in two, steward takes monarchy of the 2nd kingdom.

You have now lowered the 'avg. kd competency' level, probably by a large margin.

Every 'split' kingdom created by a change like this would be worse than the kingdom they were split from.

People would defect and recreate accounts until finally quitting, since recruitments spots would go quick. Would there be any? Would kingdoms auto-fill to max or would the last 2 slots be recruit only?

I'm probably exaggerating the severity of the effects this would have, but ultimately the question for any change involving smaller kingdoms is: where will the monarchs come from?

[Pillz]

I guess the game is going to end soon, Steel and i actually agree on something after all these years.Either that or lightning is about to strike us.

But she did.... what is happening

[jmiedema]

Also, the less provinces you have in the kingdom, the less room there is for strategic flair in the setup. With 10 provs you pretty much have to go like 8 attackers, leaving 2 t/m type slots. Most kingdoms would require at least one of these to be mystic for MS blanketing. Also that "one" inactive you have in your kingdoms is now 2.5x more damaging to your kingdom.

Lastly, so little provinces would make deep chaining no longer a strategy which makes it extremely difficult to take out a heavy attackers (like undeads) offense. This will drag out more wars to be week long slugfests, and also make whatever personality has +1 gen be pretty much an absolute necessity for your attackers in order to even deep chain 1 province.

I do think that there are many people who would lead a 10-12 province kingdom that wouldn't even try to monarch or steward a 25 prov kd. So yea I do think you would find monarchs, but I agree with the person above who says that dividing the kingdom actually further diminishes the average kingdoms skill level. (because lets face it, the good, active players would all stick together -- and the inactive problem provinces would all be put together, and then disband). Good luck having the fire power to raze kill a province with 9 provs lol.

[khronosschoty]

Good luck having the fire power to raze kill a province with 9 provs lol.

9 province = enough "fire power" to RK....

[Pillz]

9 province = enough "fire power" to RK....

Maybe. Maybe. But then only 9 are able to enjoy in the fun.

[Bart of Sparta]

Maybe. Maybe. But then only 9 are able to enjoy in the fun.

10! You forgot yourself!

[Ovenmitt]

Think of it first.

Picture the worst ghetto you've ever played in.

Now split that ghetto in two, steward takes monarchy of the 2nd kingdom.

You have now lowered the 'avg. kd competency' level, probably by a large margin.

Every 'split' kingdom created by a change like this would be worse than the kingdom they were split from.

People would defect and recreate accounts until finally quitting, since recruitments spots would go quick. Would there be any? Would kingdoms auto-fill to max or would the last 2 slots be recruit only?

I'm probably exaggerating the severity of the effects this would have, but ultimately the question for any change involving smaller kingdoms is: where will the monarchs come from?

The entire reason the game doesn't work right now is because there are too few kingdoms. Your logic ultimately is FOR smaller kingdoms, because newsflash: **** ghettoes are still going to be **** ghettoes. The upper 2/3 of the gameplay, however, is going to benefit.