Land Based Gains system

[Legality]

Hello,

I started playing Utopia right when the NW based gains system was implemented. Can anyone explain to me how land based gains work? Does this mean deep chaining will be more difficult?

[Persain]

Hello,

I started playing Utopia right when the NW based gains system was implemented. Can anyone explain to me how land based gains work?

Land based gains means your gains depend only on the relative acres between the you and who u hit.

In the past(nw based gains) hiting someone who was "Fat" meant if i was 300k nw i might hit someone who is also 300k nw but has 2k acres while i only have 1500 acres. I'd get base gains off their 2k acres, since 300k=300k. Land based gains means if i hit that same person i'd get LESS of their land because 2000=/=1500.

In the future (land based gains) means to hit someone who is "fat" if im 300k nw and 1500 acres i may hit someone who is 150k nw and 1500 acres. Even though i have twice their nw since 1500=1500 my "best" gains is hitting them. If i were to hit someone who was say 4500 acres and 300k nw im going to get terrble gains because 4500>>>1500.

Does this mean deep chaining will be more difficult?

yes AND no.

YES:
if i have a kd where my smallest person is 1500 acres and 350k nw and my biggest person is 2000 acres and 400k nw and i am chaining an attacker that starts on 2500 acres and 500k nw. I will have more difficulty chainging them deep.
---NW based gains---This is because that 2500 acre prov had say 325k nw just in military even if they are 400 acres they would still retain enough nw that im geting nearly base gains per hit using my 1500 acre 350k nw attacker. i.e. 325k hitting 350k results in "good" gains.
---Land based gains--- The change means that my 1500 acre guy now is going to have massively reduced gains since 400<<1500. since each hit gives me less of their land per hit yes they will stay bigger and its going to be hard to chain.


No:
if i have a kd where my smallest person is 550 acres and 125k nw and my biggest person is 2500 acres and 500k nw and i am chaining an attacker that starts on 2500 acres and 500k nw. I will have LESS difficulty chainging them deep.
---NW based gains---This is because that 2500 acre prov had say 325k nw just in military even if they are 400 acres they would still retain enough nw that my "finisher" on 550 acres and 125k nw is hitting massively oor into someone who is 350k nw. Though the person they are hiting may be say 400 acres the gains terrible and i'll struggle to finish him off.
---Land based gains--- The change means that my 550 acre guy now is going to have massively improved gains since 550~~400. since each hit gives me more of their land per hit i will be able to chain them down deeper and easier than in the past

_______________________
Best way to chain
NW based gains:
1.Have a tight spread of nw in your kd----Hit someone who is army out but about to get their army in and has low incoming land. They will retain nw as you chain so hit in nw range and deep chain them while making them keep dspecs/peasents as possible. They reaslease as much offense as possible in 1 round of hitting.
2.Have a wide spread of nw in your kd----Hit someone who is army out for a long time...make their def desert their prov and they end up on 0 def. Drag them down in rounds 2+ using your low nw provs since they'll be hitting in nw range once the enemy released some off/all def and lost their tpa/peasetns.


Land based gains:
1. Have a WIDE spread of land across your kd.---chain just like you would in nw based gains only hitting people of equal acres as your own provs. you'll likely need ALOT of offense on your smallest hitters to ensure your able to take someone deep.
2.Have a tight spread of land in your kd. Semi chain to lower military counts, once your own side has had 4-5 people chained "small" use those small people to RE-CHAIN the people u couldnt finish earlier in the war.

[yootohpeega]

Does this mean deep chaining will be more difficult?

yes AND no.

To add on to your great examples and explanations, is it also correct to say that:

Also No, because previously with NW gains, a freshly chained province with low land but high NW and military still remaining can hit the largest attackers in the enemy kingdom for max gains. The largest attackers in the enemy kingdom will have large NW (or rather, the chained province chooses a target with similar NW to him) and large land. Base gains on large land will be big, allowing the chained province to get a lot of land to stay alive longer. With land-based gains, a freshly chained province with low land but high NW and military still remaining would get less land with the above target choice (the target's land is too > the attacker's land). Choosing a target that gives you base gains (target's land is similar size to attacker's land) would be to choose a smaller acre target, so that will give you less land as well. To summarize, freshly chained provinces won't be able to max gains their way back up as easily with land-based gains. Without enough land coming in, military will desert, and the damage will be done.

Best way to chain

I've never seen it laid out so nicely, thanks. Interesting, so with NW-based gains, if your kingdom has a tight spread, you can chain deeply in a concentrated wave, but once the chain target loses some military and NW, it becomes less efficient to continue hitting the target if you wanted to chain him further into the dust. If your kingdom has a wide spread, you can't chain as efficiently in a concentrated wave, but over a longer period of ticks, you can take someone down from the top into the dust. But with land-based gains, it's the opposite. A wide spread in your kingdom means that you can chain deeply in a concentrated wave. A tight spread, however, means you can't chain as efficiently in a short period of time - but there doesn't seem to be a corresponding tactic for chaining a target over a longer period of time. (What you said about using your own chain targets to hit their chain targets is something that exists with NW-based gains and a tight spread in the kingdom as well. This IMO is just a continuation of hitting each other rather than a specifically designed and coordinated chain.)

I've seen some posts about an "all elite suicider" being a viable tactic with land-based gains. What is that about?

[Madchess]

I'm more concerned that we will see everyone draft 90% on 70% homes which will be hard to counter if I only want to draft 65-70% on max 20% homes.

I feel land based gains is all about cramping as much as possible into as few acres as possible where nw based gains the quality of what you build counted for more than quantity.

[StratOcastle]

It will be interesting to note how kingdoms adapt their t/m strats.

Immediately, I'm intrigued with artillery packs as seen on tv(in ww2 documentaries).

The Virtual Kingdom template is going to come into its own, if my intuition isn't garbled by Celebrator Doppelbock.

[yootohpeega]

I'm more concerned that we will see everyone draft 90% on 70% homes which will be hard to counter if I only want to draft 65-70% on max 20% homes.

I feel land based gains is all about cramping as much as possible into as few acres as possible where nw based gains the quality of what you build counted for more than quantity.

Ahh, I see. So with NW-based gains, you want a greater quality-to-NW ratio, whereas with land-based gains, you want greater quality-to-land ratio (where by "quality" I just mean military or wpa/tpa, etc.).

But won't kingdoms still size each other up for war by looking at opponent NW? NW is still the best indicator of how much military/thieves/wizards a kingdom has. Or perhaps in a land-based gain system, the way to size up other kingdoms is by NWPA (and NW, but whereas it used to be that NW was more important than NWPA, now NWPA might become relatively more important than before). NWPA tells you how much a province has "stuffed" into their land. The more you stuff, the better in a land-based gain system.

[Persain]

To add on to your great examples and explanations, is it also correct to say that:

it is

I've never seen it laid out so nicely, thanks.

welcome

I've seen some posts about an "all elite suicider" being a viable tactic with land-based gains. What is that about?

it means your smallest 3 provs run 100% leet orcs warrior or avain tacts and are 400-500 acre when the kd average is say 1500. since your already so small compared to the enemy they wont really b able to overpop you and you have enough offense to make sure you can topfeed ->finish chains easily even if the target has a lot of def.

I'm more concerned that we will see everyone draft 90% on 70% homes which will be hard to counter if I only want to draft 65-70% on max 20% homes.

I feel land based gains is all about cramping as much as possible into as few acres as possible where nw based gains the quality of what you build counted for more than quantity.

its already advantageous (with nw based gains) to overpop yourself with military even if its not nw efficient because military>>>>peasents.... and even if its not perefectly nw effienct you can think of high nw/acre as effectively running some GS.

also for what its worth dragons/declare range still are based on NW, my gut says people pump to 3-5 ppa just like currently before war otherwise you are just wasting time.

[yootohpeega]

it is



it means your smallest 3 provs run 100% leet orcs warrior or avain tacts and are 400-500 acre when the kd average is say 1500. since your already so small compared to the enemy they wont really b able to overpop you and you have enough offense to make sure you can topfeed ->finish chains easily even if the target has a lot of def.

Ah, I see. Thank you.

[Thunder TA]

Yet it still seems more logical to have fixed the net manipulation that a few were doing than going back to a system that had already been abused by most of the same people already. Kind of a pick your poison because land based gains hurt new players more than net gains . Atleast with net gains they had a clue and had built a province that was in range of the top people . Now all they have to do is log in blindly and explore like he old days and unknowingly they are there also. Much easier to get fed upon now .

[JeffT]

Yet it still seems more logical to have fixed the net manipulation that a few were doing than going back to a system that had already been abused by most of the same people already. Kind of a pick your poison because land based gains hurt new players more than net gains . Atleast with net gains they had a clue and had built a province that was in range of the top people . Now all they have to do is log in blindly and explore like he old days and unknowingly they are there also. Much easier to get fed upon now .

Except you no longer have 3 days of protection to optimize, and a LBG system is actually more logical -- lots of new players are confused about why they gain less land when attacking someone big than them.

[Madchess]

Oh yes there is that too you explore 400 acres and now you are protected relatively agains people who did not explore at all by simply beeing 800 insted of 400 acres.

[Thunder TA]

New players being confused is why they have a team to play with and this wonderful new guide with tutorials to explain to them why,And yes Madchess it will while being fed because you have low or no defense by the 800-1000 acre people like before.

[Ethan]

... my gut says people pump to 3-5 ppa just like currently before war otherwise you are just wasting time.

Why are you running so many pes? Last time I remember land gains "leet play" said to pump to negative ppa - I see no reason it won't be that way again. (Er, is it wiz that don't count as military, or is negative ppa impossible now due to the "military larger than total pop" limit?)


I would *really* like a comparison of total wars fought - I think it is going to go *way* down, and I'm not going to stick around for much longer just to sit pumping all age. Especially cause I can't even pump the important part - science.


I'm also just totally baffled by the thinking here:
"Know what's useless currently - peasants! Lets fix it by making peasants less valuable!"


The idea of not being war ready until after a fort-raze-rebuild cycle to overdraft... and then because it eats all your income having to drop draft to rebuild your gc stockpile after all of maybe 24 hours... just spend another 3 days to get back to the exact same place it really unappealing. Like, I'd advise my kingdom to simply never fight a war unless we initiate... and of course, if everyone does that (which they should, or they'll lose) then no-one *ever* accepts a war.

[Tadpole]

Why are you running so many pes? Last time I remember land gains "leet play" said to pump to negative ppa - I see no reason it won't be that way again. (Er, is it wiz that don't count as military, or is negative ppa impossible now due to the "military larger than total pop" limit?)


I would *really* like a comparison of total wars fought - I think it is going to go *way* down, and I'm not going to stick around for much longer just to sit pumping all age. Especially cause I can't even pump the important part - science.


I'm also just totally baffled by the thinking here:
"Know what's useless currently - peasants! Lets fix it by making peasants less valuable!"


The idea of not being war ready until after a fort-raze-rebuild cycle to overdraft... and then because it eats all your income having to drop draft to rebuild your gc stockpile after all of maybe 24 hours... just spend another 3 days to get back to the exact same place it really unappealing. Like, I'd advise my kingdom to simply never fight a war unless we initiate... and of course, if everyone does that (which they should, or they'll lose) then no-one *ever* accepts a war.

Most wars in the t. 15-40 I've seen have had most provs pumped down to 2-4 PPA (post homes). Don't see that changing in that tier with the changes. Very few people consider nw efficiency, since pumping deeper is always better - irrespective. And I don't see that changing.

Drafting deeper = neg income, which isn't viable for warring kd's unless they've got a war lined up. And if they do have that, the opponent will just draft equally deep (or lose bcs worse prep), and pumping isn't really an issue game wise, only tactically.

Optimal game play if you want to win any given war already is, and will keep on being, drafting to negative peons, and cycle in and out of fort to re-pump if you don't find a war. That doesn't mean people do. Or will do given lba. Since it effectively leads to no wars. No honor whoring kd, no warring kd and no ghetto will ever resort to these cycles. Because it will hurt your goals (of attaining honor, or getting many wars, of having a few fun wars) doing so.

I know you're very fond of nw efficiency measures Ethan. And have been for a long time. And you're very right in many your arguments (especially in comparing, one dimension of, race strengths). But I think your deduction is wrong.

Raw power > nw efficiency already (else, top kd's wouldn't draft down to 0 or negative ppa)
KDs below the top tier will, also in the future, try get wars - and not resort to cycles of deep pumping. Why would they? That way, like you say, they won't find any wars.

This would have been different if, like in ancient times, wars could be forced. But they can't. People will still look at warring kd's with relative equal prep and power.

My own play as waring and sometimes honor tier monarch is a case in point. Problem was never to build the most efficient prov, pump and prep the best (when I did I lost, because I didn't get any wars, which = loosing) - it was to find someone with equal prep, so that I could actually get a war. That won't change. Most kingdoms war on even footing - they don't chase optimal pumps. And if they do, they go about things wrong.

LBG should by the logic of the current meta not change OOW play or preps very much. They will radically change the in-war dynamics though. For good and bad :)

[skoyl12]

In general land based gains favor bottom feeding and pumped provinces.
Also there is a personal explore pool as i read and not a kd wide one, so ideally you want to be a little bit bigger than the rest so when exploring reaches a point where it's very expensive you can hit lower with safety.
War spoils might also be important this age cos an attack that gives you land directly might get you out of range of your target (free hit)
Chaining with current gains was most hits in a small time window while target still had nw to maximize gains. With land based gains i doubt we'll see people chained to 150 acres or less but chains to -50% to -60% of pre chain land size should be more common.