Age 55 potential changes

[khronosschoty]

um

that was just one feary in my kd, not even the best.

That was just the state of my province right now. And the Faery is just out of range of "being easy" otherwise ...

And the fact is: my province has nothing to do with it.. if I can see a easy formula that makes the faery easy to beat, thats all the proof there needs to be. But the fact that I've never experienced taking out faeries to be all that hard says something.

[newatthis]

Maybe a better option would have been to offer the losing KD partial rewards. Credits to recover, lesser amount of free science. This still coincides with your intentions to encourage war, without strengthening hit-and-run tactics.

i agree ... i don't feel war win bonus makes me easier to get a war ... i mean few ages ago we can get 10 wars in one age, now we're not lucky to even have 8 ... some kd become so picky lately ... if u give the losing kd some kind of help to recover fast, maybe ppl won't be too picky or scared n we can get more wars next age

[Mal]

That was just the state of my province right now. And the Faery is just out of range of "being easy" otherwise ...

And the fact is: my province has nothing to do with it.. if I can see a easy formula that makes the faery easy to beat, thats all the proof there needs to be. But the fact that I've never experienced taking out faeries to be all that hard says something.

Perhaps it just says that you play against poor opponents? Considering both my kingdom and Persian's run faery we are hardly complaining about faery being overpowered because they are beating us. I guess I could also point out that both of our kingdoms have won every war.

I don't believe that halflings are an effective counter to faery because even if you can break their theives (possible I guess) it'd be way better to OP attackers with your stealth so you don't fail 50%+.

[paulnguyen1229]

3 offspecs/acre won't even give you 20 opa with +20% OME and every unit on a pony. Get real paulnguyen. Faery is by no means an a/t/m.

Of course that was a joke but with some truth, Palem.
Currently, faeries dont train ospec just dspec for dragon. With next age, ALL faeries will have a nice number of ospec to ambush and dragon duty. Isn't that an HUGE improvement on its own? Versatility. Now to move it a step further. What if you decide to go a little aggressive and have 5-6 ospa and be a pretty decent attacker against same NW attackers with armies out?While still having your 6 pt elite to turtle behind along with the numerous spells, etc , etc, etc. Why can't a faery be an attacker? 1 general, sure. BUT thats 1 attack, 1 unique every 10 hours more than this age. The mere fact that its POSSIBLE is miles ahead of what faeries are this age. Can they compete against attackers? Of course not, but is it an improvement? BY FAR

[Avenger]

Having a province dedicated to breaking the "unbreakable" provs is as much of a waste as having a faery TM.

lol. Can't believe I'm hearing this from you.

/ontopic: humans suck.

[Bukharistan]

I'd like to add a small thing, didn't read all reactions.

Been warring quite a lot this age, and at one point we were facing an all-Orc KD.

As a faery/mystic I had 6 raw wpa and 140% science.

The opposing KD had their Orcs fully pumped with wpa (2.5-3 raw). I got through like 1/5 and of that like 40-50% was reflected. Orcs are simply way overpowered with the RM they have. Just imagine the gains of an Orc/Sage running libs next age...

Orcs practically have no cons as it stands. My suggestion is to remove RM and either give them higher offensive losses or remove the elite credits (lower elite cost to 750).

Last point is to perhaps change the honor-gains system. If you look at the honor charts now, nearly all top-honor provinces are Elves and Faeries.

[Mordrek]

Numbers will be tweaked, so I won't discuss them until they post the second set of changes... however:

"Winning a war will not grant any honor taken from your opponents honor pool. Monarchs will instead be able to set a kingdom reward for winning wars, this reward will be 10% honor or land generated based on your kingdoms current honor/land. The reward will be allocated more heavily towards provinces with less land/honor."

I thought wars were about risk vs reward. You take on a strong kd and if you win then you can farm them. Creating these acres from thin air will just increase the incentive for kds to run asap if they're on the losing side, instead of them trying to fight back and/or maximizing their potential return before wd'ing.

Now, I do know that I suggested that 10% of the enemy acres would be given to your kingdom if you win, half evenly dispersed and the other half for the monarch to plan with, but this suggestion is just silly. Let's say you're the no 1 honour kd in the world. All you have to do is have some friends in some super ghetto with 0 honour give you the button, and you can farm them freely while still gaining so much honour from the wd that it's silly. The top kd right now would get 10k honour from a WW, even if they fought a kingdom filled with peasants.

But it's not the only abusable part. As long as you work with acres being created from thin air with your own kingdom's size as multiplier, then you open up for some funny friendship tactics. The run for the crown could be decided by who have the most friends, since the top kd would get 25k acres for a min time war just by the WW if a friend gave them an easy war - even if the friends were a 10th of their size.

So the idea is good. However, what you have to do is use the losing kd's size or honour as modifier, and make the losing kd actually lose that as a result of them losing the war. Then you have a decent risk / reward equation with a great upside if your kingdom is a good war kd.

[Natsu]

Having a static gain/loss for WW is a bad idea. My view is length of war, difference in size between both kingdoms from before and withdraw time should be considered in how much a kingdom gains or loses. You can also take into account the starting point and finishing point between each kingdom to further effect the exchange. I feel that you should earn more for pummeling a kingdom within +/- 10% of your kingdom persay than both kingdoms finishing closely under the same setting.

Could be something like (both kingdoms start within 10% of each other):

Kingdom A ends 5% larger than Kingdom B = 1% WW reward
Kingdom A ends 10% larger than Kingdom B = 3% WW reward
Kingdom A ends 15% larger than Kingdom B = 5% WW reward
Kingdom A ends 20% larger than Kingdom B = 7% WW reward
Kingdom A ends 25% larger than Kingdom B = 9% WW reward
Kingdom A ends 30% larger than Kingdom B = 11% WW reward
Kingdom A ends 35% larger than Kingdom B = 13% WW reward
Kingdom A ends 40% larger than Kingdom B = 15% WW reward
Kingdom A ends 45% larger than Kingdom B = 17% WW reward
Kingdom A ends 50% larger than Kingdom B = 19% WW reward

Another thing is to set minimum war time to 72 Hours instead of 48 Hours. This way kingdoms can't hit and run but also forces kingdoms to work together for a victory since bonuses end up staggered depending on the damage difference. There should be more Honor awarded awarded to kingdoms destroying kingdoms closer to their size and diminishing rewards for going outside of that window.

[Avenger]

I'd like to add a small thing, didn't read all reactions.

Been warring quite a lot this age, and at one point we were facing an all-Orc KD.

As a faery/mystic I had 6 raw wpa and 140% science.

The opposing KD had their Orcs fully pumped with wpa (2.5-3 raw). I got through like 1/5 and of that like 40-50% was reflected. Orcs are simply way overpowered with the RM they have. Just imagine the gains of an Orc/Sage running libs next age...

Orcs practically have no cons as it stands. My suggestion is to remove RM and either give them higher offensive losses or remove the elite credits (lower elite cost to 750).

Last point is to perhaps change the honor-gains system. If you look at the honor charts now, nearly all top-honor provinces are Elves and Faeries.

Use MV maybe?
Trust me, orcs do have cons. Their stealth is close to useless (unless Tact ) and their mana is totally useless (except for the casual defensive spell).
Try fighting late-age undeads(especially clerics) with said orcs.

[TheRock]

[21:49] <therock> We will also be adding in a number of mechanic changes to address issues and to facilitate kingdom goals via warring.
[21:49] <therock> GODDAMMIT TROLL BISHOP
[21:50] <therock> ok this discussion is cancelled because bishop is trolling
[21:50] <ata> has that ever stopped us before?
[21:50] <therock> until we know the changes it's ****in pointless
[21:50] <ata> bishop it always trolling
[21:50] <therock> goddammit
[21:50] <therock> EVERY ****ING AGE
[21:50] <ata> yes it's pointless
[21:50] <therock> EVERY AGE HE TROLLS ME

[Palem]

Of course that was a joke but with some truth, Palem.
Currently, faeries dont train ospec just dspec for dragon. With next age, ALL faeries will have a nice number of ospec to ambush and dragon duty. Isn't that an HUGE improvement on its own? Versatility. Now to move it a step further. What if you decide to go a little aggressive and have 5-6 ospa and be a pretty decent attacker against same NW attackers with armies out?While still having your 6 pt elite to turtle behind along with the numerous spells, etc , etc, etc. Why can't a faery be an attacker? 1 general, sure. BUT thats 1 attack, 1 unique every 10 hours more than this age. The mere fact that its POSSIBLE is miles ahead of what faeries are this age. Can they compete against attackers? Of course not, but is it an improvement? BY FAR

1. By it's very definition, you can't turtle if your offense is spec-based.
2. This age Faeries can very safely quad-tap chained provs. They were better "attackers" this age
3. If faeries train more offense, they have less defense and they stop being this beacon of "safety" that everyone is complaining about.
4. 5-6 ospa is still not enough enough to get you to 40 opa (attackers usually aim for 40dpa army home, but that may change with the specs changing) unless you're a warrior in war, in which case you better have more than 5-6 ospa.
5. Let's assume you DO have 6 ospa. Let's leave 5 pezzies per acre for a decent econ. If you want to be an a/t/m you need at least 4.5 tpa and 4 wpa. That leaves you with 5.5 epa -> 33dpa raw. Have fun not getting hit with that...

I will give the argument a little bit of merit though. If you get a Faery on count+ honor, it will make a pretty efficient a/t/m. But that really just proves that honor is a sucky, broken mechanic.

[Sheister]

why not keep war rewards the way they are but give the option to seek a bonus honor or a bonus land reward? that would probably make everyone happy? Then, make sure loser gets enough help to get the on their feet by EoW CF end.

[Beau]

I don't really see any of the changes as an encouragement to war. IMO the mechanics changes to war this age have been some of the most positive changes ever made to the warring system. Removing the possibility of the sci reward seems entirely silly to me, on one hand claims are made about encouraging war, on the other you re-introduce the need for sustained sci pumps. It simply does not add up. Without condoning the war changes at all, as I don't believe they're neseccary in any way shape or form - I'm willing to bet that if you made sci a choice as well as land/honour that it would get picked more often than the other two with the obvious exceptions of kd's who are going for honour/nw. NOBODY likes to sit around for weeks pumping sci, attempting to avoid all conflicts with diplomacy. Yet here, that is what you have condemned us all to doing. And this is supposed to be taken as an encouragement to war? Please tell me I am missing something.

On a more personal note, which has very little, if not nothing to do with the mechanics at all: I really hate that dorfs get magic bonuses in any shape or form. "We're trying to maintain what makes each race unique" How exactly is giving perhaps one of the most magically inept races ever based in any form of fantasy a bonus to their magical capabilities "Maintaining what makes them unique"? But that is just my opinion.

[Mal]

I don't really see any of the changes as an encouragement to war. IMO the mechanics changes to war this age have been some of the most positive changes ever made to the warring system. Removing the possibility of the sci reward seems entirely silly to me, on one hand claims are made about encouraging war, on the other you re-introduce the need for sustained sci pumps. It simply does not add up. Without condoning the war changes at all, as I don't believe they're neseccary in any way shape or form - I'm willing to bet that if you made sci a choice as well as land/honour that it would get picked more often than the other two with the obvious exceptions of kd's who are going for honour/nw. NOBODY likes to sit around for weeks pumping sci, attempting to avoid all conflicts with diplomacy. Yet here, that is what you have condemned us all to doing. And this is supposed to be taken as an encouragement to war? Please tell me I am missing something.

On a more personal note, which has very little, if not nothing to do with the mechanics at all: I really hate that dorfs get magic bonuses in any shape or form. "We're trying to maintain what makes each race unique" How exactly is giving perhaps one of the most magically inept races ever based in any form of fantasy a bonus to their magical capabilities "Maintaining what makes them unique"? But that is just my opinion.

This does not replace the current war win rewards.

[Beau]

If that is actually the case then I stand corrected, and happy! Perhaps proposed changes posts could be edited to more accurately reflect that in the future so as to avoid dumbasses like me taking issue with problems that do not exist!