Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 23 of 23

Thread: Change Homes

  1. #16
    I like to post
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Utopia
    Posts
    3,932
    Quote Originally Posted by Wilmington View Post
    There is no absolute need for deep homes pumping. You are making this a way bigger issue than it is. You act like homes pumping is the only way they can do it. So let me get this straight. Some mid-tier KDs are being funded by top KDs because they're sitting around doing nothing with 80% homes and you seem to think screwing with something that's been there from the start is going to solve that issue. An issue so minor, most people don't even know what it is.

    So you want to move the pop aspect of homes from capacity to % based. You really don't think they would make a new category just for homes. Now you're screwing with the 90% of the rest of the server who use homes so your few KDs have a little tougher time.
    You seem to just not understand the impact of the change I suggest. What I suggest will absolutely NOT affect the large majority of the player base directly, as only like 2% of the player base really does proper homes pumping above say 30%. If you never build more than 30% homes, this change will simply not affect your game at all in any way.

    Top-KDs do not sit around on 80% homes. Most top-KDs don't even run any homes at all during their stacking phase, since they are drafted so low it would just cost them income due to lack of jobs. They build homes mostly during the last prosperous phase before conflict to increase draft speed, deepness and maintain high BE while drafting deeply.

    However, the extra 50% homes (for 80% homes pump), if modified by pop/honor might come down to 6 extra pop to train up, which for most races would necessitate an extra 2.5-3K gc/acre. Assuming a normal prov can create about 50 gc/hour, that means an extra 50-60 hours of obligatory stacking. And that, my dear friend, matters. Like, a LOT.

    In the current meta if you win a war and end up equal acres with a KD waiting for you, you mostly have EOW CF + notice (72 hours) = 6 days to prepare for that conflict. Most KDs bar say Sleepy this age can at best managed a 20-30% homes pump, while the KD that waited OOW can do an 80% homes-pump, therefore has 6 mpa more on average on their entire KD, and therefore will 9/10 win the war. In competitive play this usually leads to 1 KD simply agreeing to pay a tax to re-CF, then wait to vulture the next KD. These mechanisms lead to top-KDs warring less, stacking more, which leads to a trickle-down effect of cash toward friendly KDs, which in turn affects the warring tier.

  2. #17
    Forum Fanatic khronosschoty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,506
    Sure, remove homes for an age, bring them back anther age etc.
    #magi

  3. #18
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    190
    It doesn't matter at all. You can pump and pump and pump and fight 1 war all age and be the baddest KD ever. Who cares? You are still talking about a minor issue that affects almost nobody that anyone can do, and probably has done at one time or another. Because you don't like how a very small minority of people are using them, you want to change something that has always been.

    It will change game play if you make homes bonus different than it is now. Right now, 30% homes gives you +12% pop. If you change that, it will affect game play in a huge way. Putting a max on a capacity building is like saying you can build more stables, but they won't hold more horses.

    So sitting around looking for a war with extra homes to keep BE and econ is a bad thing? What else are you going to do with TGs, rax and hosps you aren't using atm? Everyone does it, you're just mad because some people do it better.

  4. #19
    I like to post
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Utopia
    Posts
    3,932
    Quote Originally Posted by Wilmington View Post
    It doesn't matter at all. You can pump and pump and pump and fight 1 war all age and be the baddest KD ever. Who cares? You are still talking about a minor issue that affects almost nobody that anyone can do, and probably has done at one time or another. Because you don't like how a very small minority of people are using them, you want to change something that has always been.

    It will change game play if you make homes bonus different than it is now. Right now, 30% homes gives you +12% pop. If you change that, it will affect game play in a huge way. Putting a max on a capacity building is like saying you can build more stables, but they won't hold more horses.

    So sitting around looking for a war with extra homes to keep BE and econ is a bad thing? What else are you going to do with TGs, rax and hosps you aren't using atm? Everyone does it, you're just mad because some people do it better.
    It will not change the gameplay if you only run 30% homes... right now 30% homes gives you a 12% buff in population, with my proposed changed you'll get 15%. The only difference is that running more than 30% homes (assuming 100% BE) no longer pays off.

    Along with BB, Emeriti and CR I'm the best homes-pumper the game got at the moment. You see, I'm explicitly asking for the removal of a mechanic that favors me, and the reason I suggest it is because I understand the big picture.

    Anyways, I got a feeling you're just trying to troll this topic as you keep repeating questions I already answered xD

  5. #20
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    190
    1. You can't have the pop bonus based on BE. That's just not going to happen
    2. You can't make a % based building cap at 30%. If you could, 20% homes would be OP and everyone would have to have them
    3. The big picture you speak of is actually a tiny picture. The big picture would be how it affects the entire server.
    4. This is not trolling, it's telling you very specific problems with your suggestion and how your skill in taking advantage of a certain building well within it's intended functions doesn't really matter to most of us, so it's not worth changing something that's been around forever.

  6. #21
    I like to post
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Utopia
    Posts
    3,932
    Quote Originally Posted by Wilmington View Post
    1. You can't have the pop bonus based on BE. That's just not going to happen
    2. You can't make a % based building cap at 30%. If you could, 20% homes would be OP and everyone would have to have them
    3. The big picture you speak of is actually a tiny picture. The big picture would be how it affects the entire server.
    4. This is not trolling, it's telling you very specific problems with your suggestion and how your skill in taking advantage of a certain building well within it's intended functions doesn't really matter to most of us, so it's not worth changing something that's been around forever.
    1. Thats what suggestions are for...
    2. Banks? And, So ur saying in current mechanics 20% homes = OP?
    3. It does affect the entire server
    4. See 3

  7. #22
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    190
    20% homes now is +8% pop. That's not OP. What you are suggesting would mean the multiplier for the pop bonus of homes is ~.71 to get pop at 15% with 30% homes (.7 x .3 x .71=.15) 20% homes would then be 11%. That would be OP. The idea of making the pop bonus dependent on BE is just insane. Gold dragon then becomes OP. Dwarf becomes OP by getting 15% pop from 20% homes. Since pop affects BE, having BE affect pop creates feedback. That causes problems which is why libraries weren't affected by BE. They would both keep going up until 1 was maxed.

    Soooo, pop bonus can't be affected by BE

    Maxing homes at 30% is way too low. I've done more than that many times when getting chained as a survival tactic. If I wasn't pumping wizzies, I would have more than that now. You want to max it at 50% for +20% pop, go ahead if it makes you feel better. That would not affect most people.

    While what you are suggesting would make the number of homes I use better, it would tip the scale so everyone would have them and there goes my advantage. Put it this way, if 30% homes gave +15% pop, everyone would have 20-30% homes all the time. You want to increase the effectiveness of the building but put a max on it. Don't you see that just doesn't make sense?

    They have changed the bonus in the past, and they might change it again, but they are not going to change the way it is applied because they really can't.

    On a side note, as a UD with AD/TW I can keep a lot of pezzies and not worry about overpop when I get chained so I find myself keeping more homes and pezzies and have much better econ and higher max pop. Just keep land coming in and I lose nothing but what would otherwise be already dead.

  8. #23
    I like to post
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Utopia
    Posts
    3,932
    Quote Originally Posted by Wilmington View Post
    20% homes now is +8% pop. That's not OP. What you are suggesting would mean the multiplier for the pop bonus of homes is ~.71 to get pop at 15% with 30% homes (.7 x .3 x .71=.15) 20% homes would then be 11%. That would be OP. The idea of making the pop bonus dependent on BE is just insane. Gold dragon then becomes OP. Dwarf becomes OP by getting 15% pop from 20% homes. Since pop affects BE, having BE affect pop creates feedback. That causes problems which is why libraries weren't affected by BE. They would both keep going up until 1 was maxed.

    Soooo, pop bonus can't be affected by BE

    Maxing homes at 30% is way too low. I've done more than that many times when getting chained as a survival tactic. If I wasn't pumping wizzies, I would have more than that now. You want to max it at 50% for +20% pop, go ahead if it makes you feel better. That would not affect most people.

    While what you are suggesting would make the number of homes I use better, it would tip the scale so everyone would have them and there goes my advantage. Put it this way, if 30% homes gave +15% pop, everyone would have 20-30% homes all the time. You want to increase the effectiveness of the building but put a max on it. Don't you see that just doesn't make sense?

    They have changed the bonus in the past, and they might change it again, but they are not going to change the way it is applied because they really can't.

    On a side note, as a UD with AD/TW I can keep a lot of pezzies and not worry about overpop when I get chained so I find myself keeping more homes and pezzies and have much better econ and higher max pop. Just keep land coming in and I lose nothing but what would otherwise be already dead.
    1. Ok let's put the bonus at 12% at 30% coverage --> solved.
    2. Ok, let's make it unaffected by BE --> solved.
    3. Going into war on high homes is dumb because if you get razed post-chain and over-pop even worse.
    4. You'll have to adjust your strategies, so will the rest of the server. If you draft deeper than you should you'll lose BE/income and your province might become less effective. Currently there is no down-side to deep-pumping, let's make that a strategic matter :)

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
  •