Age 71 Proposed Changes Suggestions

[Minty]

I like bart's suggestion on orc, ud, elf, rogue, sage and warhero

[Verminator]

Heeeeey how about that smack in the face orcs just got! Give them bloodlust, then add another 15% losses on top of that! Shame to force a building on a race, 30% hospitals or you're out of the fight after day one. No point to choosing orc with its dead last sustainability now. How hard is it to not go to an extreme to make a simple fix? Oy, poor orc, you'll finally get your shot at the bottom of the race breakdown...

[Slayerviper]

Heeeeey how about that smack in the face orcs just got! Give them bloodlust, then add another 15% losses on top of that! Shame to force a building on a race, 30% hospitals or you're out of the fight after day one. No point to choosing orc with its dead last sustainability now. How hard is it to not go to an extreme to make a simple fix? Oy, poor orc, you'll finally get your shot at the bottom of the race breakdown...

Does Orc have to be OP all the time? They have the best initial offence output (as UD will never quite match until later on in a war due to conversions) but are actually susceptible to being hurt more so than usual. Maybe a slight Orc nerf is more of an issue because UD is so strong... maybe knock UD a notch or two then the orc downfalls won't seem so bad.

So many people complaint about UD 15/1.

Realistically they will have 10 epa max. Added to this they will probably run maximum 4 ospa to maintain 8dspa and 7 pop space for thieves/wiz.

(10*17+4*11)*1.5 = 321 opa. All leet and spec fully mounted.

This is also 58 dpa army in without mods so say ~ 75 dpa max.

That is eaily tripleable by almost all attacking races army in!

You fear the UD breaking tm's with 321 opa? Let them and watch the UD have 1 army out anoned get chained to the ground. Tm's aren't supposed to be unbreakable.

Or do the math of a faery TM.

16 epa. 5tpa 8wpa = 29 pop space same as UD.

(16*10)*1.55 = 248 dpa.

So to hit a faery an UD has to use almost all off just to break at equal size and if they do leave them opened to being 4x by all attacking races and 5x by warriors.

Ppl need to stop whinging. Yea it's a huge off but look at the drawbacks and how easily you can destroy them if they choose to chain a TM.

I like how people assuming t/m's and attackers are always on the same size... you do know that there are generally bigger attackers than TM's and these changes enables big attackers to not only hammer a t/m easier but still make additional hits on attackers for acre intake. As usual spout all of our scenario's that suit our view points... anything can be countered and anyone can be destroyed easy. I find t/m's are easier to drop more than ever... now its even easier (been playing since age 50). It should require effort, not the half assed methods of today.

In the last couple of ages when I did play it was easy to drop 2-3 tms in war and that was with a smaller attacking core and yes "losing" all our attackers didn't result in war losses. Most people are so short sighted on short war win strategies... Don't even get me started on bounce wave tactics and UD ffs....anyways beating a dead horse. I'm done.

[Verminator]

I'm all for a proper nerf to orcs, but this was extreme and reckless. Kinda like orcs themselves though! Ha!

But seriously, what sense is in 30% greater military losses AND extra resource loss AND a thievery penalty? Orc gets wonderful initial output, but then fall flat and they do it to themselves, don't even need to be chained or opped. Just let em attack a couple times.

[MasterShake2129]

Undead
Bonuses
-75% Offensive losses on attacks you make
Spreads and is Immune to The Plague
No Food Required
Attacks convert Offensive Specialists into Elites
Defensive losses automatically convert to soldiers(Permanent Animate Dead)
+3 Offensive Specialist strength

Penalties
Basic Thievery (Intel Operations Only)
No Elite Training
-35% Science Effectiveness (remove)
Add: no access to anon

Spell book: Town Watch
Elite: 15/1, 10.5NW

[Verminator]

And yes, odd that the initial community feedback didn't really say "nerf orcs hard" but it happened. The initial feedback did say undead war hero was crazy and neither was touched. Guess we can tell which race and personality the new guys favor. ;)

[Slayerviper]

I'm all for a proper nerf to orcs, but this was extreme and reckless. Kinda like orcs themselves though! Ha!

But seriously, what sense is in 30% greater military losses AND extra resource loss AND a thievery penalty? Orc gets wonderful initial output, but then fall flat and they do it to themselves, don't even need to be chained or opped. Just let em attack a couple times.

to be fair I think a better trade off would be a minor sci penalty still but lose the reduced military losses. The 20% extra damage is enough to punish a large orc attacker, the tpa loss is more of a slap in the face with a wet noodle.

[Smitty87]

Does Orc have to be OP all the time? They have the best initial offence output (as UD will never quite match until later on in a war due to conversions) but are actually susceptible to being hurt more so than usual. Maybe a slight Orc nerf is more of an issue because UD is so strong... maybe knock UD a notch or two then the orc downfalls won't seem so bad.

I like how people assuming t/m's and attackers are always on the same size... you do know that there are generally bigger attackers than TM's and these changes enables big attackers to not only hammer a t/m easier but still make additional hits on attackers for acre intake. As usual spout all of our scenario's that suit our view points... anything can be countered and anyone can be destroyed easy. I find t/m's are easier to drop more than ever... now its even easier (been playing since age 50). It should require effort, not the half assed methods of today.

In the last couple of ages when I did play it was easy to drop 2-3 tms in war and that was with a smaller attacking core and yes "losing" all our attackers didn't result in war losses. Most people are so short sighted on short war win strategies... anyways beating a dead horse. I'm done.

Dropping 2-3 tm's in a war still leaves anywhere from 6-8 untouched.

UD is not overpowered with 15/1. Weak weak dpa even army in. A kd of orcs vs uds leans very heavily to the orcs with +kills if they wave all the uds army in. That's 3-4x army in on all attackers. Goodbye opa on the UD

[Slayerviper]

Dropping 2-3 tm's in a war still leaves anywhere from 6-8 untouched.

UD is not overpowered with 15/1. Weak weak dpa even army in. A kd of orcs vs uds leans very heavily to the orcs with +kills if they wave all the uds army in. That's 3-4x army in on all attackers. Goodbye opa on the UD

sorry I should have note I only played in a 25 man KD twice so 3 t/ms is pretty huge in the 21-23 range. I don't factor army home because if your caught with army home your failing the KD with inactivity and your province is going to get toasted getting hit army home, doesn't matter what you are unless your a dorf or human.

[StratOcastle]

You don't have to be an Orc, but there will always be at least 3 in The Virtual Kingdom.

Proposed changes are just that. How about 15%? or 10%? resource losses.
Half the fun is baiting faery to retal. That 20% makes them feel like George McFly punching Biff.

You're my density.

[zaza945]

Dropping 2-3 tm's in a war still leaves anywhere from 6-8 untouched.

UD is not overpowered with 15/1. Weak weak dpa even army in. A kd of orcs vs uds leans very heavily to the orcs with +kills if they wave all the uds army in. That's 3-4x army in on all attackers. Goodbye opa on the UD

More like hello opa, good bye total offense! ;)

War hero seems too strong and also all over the place - the +10% gains is too nice a buff to also have everything else it has. As it is now, seems like the top be all WH cores, with +gains, more honor from randoming, being able to WS while whoring and not anoning, ect.

[jmiedema]

You don't have to be an Orc, but there will always be at least 3 in The Virtual Kingdom.

Proposed changes are just that. How about 15%? or 10%? resource losses.
Half the fun is baiting faery to retal. That 20% makes them feel like George McFly punching Biff.

You're my density.

I think lowering it to like +10% resources lost on attacks, and +5% military casualties, and the -10% tpa is more than enough negatives to put on the orc.

Even if they keep high self casualties, it wouldn't be the first ever race to be pidgeon-holed into a specific personality (in this case, cleric).

It also does make avian/human/dwarf more appealing which is always a nice change too.

Hidden gem may just be avian/cleric with its animate dead/leet credits synergy.

But yea, they need to make orc negatives like half as negative, and still need to make UD a little worse.

I really like the direction and strengths of elf and halfer, and the t/m personalities are fine.

I feel Faery is still a bit weak. (great as an UB don't get me wrong) but outside of Faery/Heretic I dont see them getting much play. They are just in kind of an awkward spot where their econ is absolutely terrible compared to halfer and elf, and they don't do any job as good as them (other than as I said fae/heretic, but even that will get rocked hard by all the halfer rogues there will be this age). Oh well I guess there is always 1 weak t/m every age. Why not have it be fae's turn.

[Elldallan]

Personally I think old devs where finally taking the game in the right direction. War based game with game mechanics to protect the warring tier which makes up 90% of the player base. New ownership time will tell but I think they are going in the wrong direction. Thing I don't get is why not just commit to war based game. If you had two servers a war based server and a growth based server. You would have probably 3k players in the war based server and maybe 300 people in the growth based server. War based server would probably attract alot more players also. Ask any war kingdom why they lose players. It's because they have to interact at some point with the growth tier.

And exactly how do you propose to keep the growth kingdoms to the "growth" server? What's to prevent them from just playing for growth on the "war" server?
And for there to be growth there needs to be something to grow off, so your concept is unfeasible.

[Magicus Lex Non Scripta]

And exactly how do you propose to keep the growth kingdoms to the "growth" server? What's to prevent them from just playing for growth on the "war" server?
And for there to be growth there needs to be something to grow off, so your concept is unfeasible.

Silly as it may be, but simply removing the land rankings and net worth rankings is likely to cause most growth kingdoms to quit, I think. So then if that guess is true, its as simple as keeping one server with those rankings and one server without.

[Magicus Lex Non Scripta]

Anther suggestion could be to, award x amount more acres than the next largest acre holder and net worth holder end of age to whomever wins the most wars on one server.

Edit: and in like manner award second place war win leader so that kingdom ends up second in land and NW end of age; and on and on.