Age 71 Proposed Changes Suggestions

[jmiedema]

Also, +1 off spec value on Avian is a super awkward bonus now that they have elite credits.. I really dont see any time (realistically) that an avian would choose to train an ospec over a leet.

I would propose to change +1 offensive specialist strength to be +1 defensive specialist strength. I think this would help avian keep pace with their role that (should be) to hit fast and have some minor turtle ability. Since you guys said your direction is for attackers to make more choices about leaving defense home. I think Avian would benefit greatly from that change.

[klaabu]

change orc +20% Enemy casualties when attacking to +20% Enemy casualties and orc will be fine ... maybe just add ambushed land will get destroyed instead
make undead elite 12 nw
there should be race spells and personality spells don't mix these two (pointing at bart - no bloodlust for undeads)

[soloni]

all elites i post are if they remain unchanged

avian: Elite: 11/4, 775gc, 10NW

Dwarf: Elite: 9/8, 850gc, 9.5NW

Halfling: Elite: 6/8, 700gc, 10NW

Faery: Elite:5/10, 1050gc, 11.5NW

elf: Elite: 8/7, 900gc, 9.5NW

Undead: Elite: 15/1, 10.5NW (though there is no elite training between WH bonus and natural revival for them its stupid an undead war hero well start the age at 12,000 offensive not counting training)

im not saying make races unbreakable but at least balance it a bit better

a faery cost for protection is insanely high. where as an elf unless they are an attack wont build elites at all because they have 0/8 d-spec units

from what i have seen of your changes these past few ages have been heavy in the favor of attackers

[jmiedema]

change orc +20% Enemy casualties when attacking to +20% Enemy casualties and orc will be fine ... maybe just add ambushed land will get destroyed instead
make undead elite 12 nw
there should be race spells and personality spells don't mix these two (pointing at bart - no bloodlust for undeads)

Or instead of Orc negatives being a straight +20% resources lost when attacked and +15% casualties, maybe have them more effected by ambush only (not general Trad Marches)

So Orc Negatives would be changed to:

+30% military losses when ambushed
+30% resources lost when ambushed
-10% TPA

Something Like that. Currently a semi-chain of Trad Marches is about as good as a deep chain vs an orc. straight +20% resources lost is ridiculous.. unplayable.
But if you change the effect around being ambushed (low defense elite already makes them susceptible to ambush) it adds a bit more strategic depth, and makes them playable.

[jmiedema]

from what i have seen of your changes these past few ages have been heavy in the favor of attackers

I have played T/M last like 4-5 ages in a solid Warring KD. I completely disagree with this statement. Faeries have been overpowered almost all these ages (I played 2 of those ages as Fae/ro and 3 of those ages as Fae Heretic) I have never felt in trouble vs a kingdom of heavy attackers. Sure I'm breakable at the start of war, but if left alone for 12h I'm generally UB. and op'ing power hasn't changed much during that time, if anything the increase from last age (+20% op damage) to this age (+40% op damage) made them even stronger..

This age Rogue and Heretic got a HUGE buff in the fact that Clear Sight will be FAR less used (only tactician has it, and tact is not really a tier 1 pick with current changes)

[merphalas]

Hey there I know there's a lot of post here but here are the changes that in my opinion should be implemented.
#1 orcs reduce the ressource losses to -10% (the main tool to bring down targets is overpop and when you get 4-5 hits out and get 30 in the 20% loss is more annoying than the 25% gain. Even with diminishing returns.
#2 cleric needed a buff and it was given one only thing I don't like is that the buff is irrelevant for avian since they already have greater prot. Cleric could have a population growth bonus instead.
#3 swap gluttonny to heretics it's a spell and it's on a rogue+ the current heretic spells are not that good and with the rogue and mystic buff they need a little help.
#4 tacticians are falling out of grace with the war hero buff would add a +100% success on Intel to really showcase their spy role as well as access to improved ambush being able to get back 60% land
#5 war heroes their a bit overpowered and don't see why they should have a spell book as big or bigger than heretics or mystics should take of pitfalls and fanaticism... That would also showcase fanaticism on avians.

Thx for reading this hope this helps.

[jmiedema]

Hey there I know there's a lot of post here but here are the changes that in my opinion should be implemented.
#1 orcs reduce the ressource losses to -10% (the main tool to bring down targets is overpop and when you get 4-5 hits out and get 30 in the 20% loss is more annoying than the 25% gain. Even with diminishing returns.
#2 cleric needed a buff and it was given one only thing I don't like is that the buff is irrelevant for avian since they already have greater prot. Cleric could have a population growth bonus instead.
#3 swap gluttonny to heretics it's a spell and it's on a rogue+ the current heretic spells are not that good and with the rogue and mystic buff they need a little help.
#4 tacticians are falling out of grace with the war hero buff would add a +100% success on Intel to really showcase their spy role as well as access to improved ambush being able to get back 60% land
#5 war heroes their a bit overpowered and don't see why they should have a spell book as big or bigger than heretics or mystics should take of pitfalls and fanaticism... That would also showcase fanaticism on avians.

Thx for reading this hope this helps.

re #2 Interesting thought. Weird since Avian/Cleric is traditionally such a synergistic combo that they would double stack GP on it. Perhaps instead of cleric getting GP, give them +5% DME, so it stacks on top of MP/GP, giving avian a bit more tankiness (which is evident that they wanted by increasing the defensive value of their elite).

[Goodwitch]

Fixed the important area. That is the area that is not fun for 90% of the server. Majority of people play utopia as a warring game, and I get that in its current form it is set up as a "Here's guidelines, do whatever you want, game" but to think that warring kingdoms should give up their fun, so whoring oriented kingdoms have "more people to play with up top" is faulty thinking imo.

The one MAJOR aspect of changes I am surprised noone is talking about, is the new War Win Bonus. Land reward bonus is a lot of land, and now it is being increased to 1.5x that land. I think warring kingdoms are blinded by the thought of 1.5x more honour that they don't realize that if you string 2-3 war wins together you are likely in the top 10 land/nw and now have to play with people that will farm you out and have their own set of rules.

It is going to be a very harsh age for some warring kingdoms I think who will get a few wars and then not know what to do when the top 5 come around to take their land and make deals with their own language on terms and how that works.

As a warring kingdom who generally sits in the top 10 by eoa, i can appreciate forcing kingdoms who have high war wins, but constantly stay small (*Cough CoL*) and force them to have to expose themselves to tougher opponents. Not sure that this is the way though.

If this War Win Bonus change goes through I think we NEED to have at least 4 day eowcf, even if it means 2 day max fort or something. Kingdoms coming out of a war will be very weak, and have now grown a ton of land and honour. This will just encourage further the meta of large kingdoms hitting a kingdom ruthlessly after eowcf ends to take that land/honour. Every kingdom in the top 20 that wins a war will be ruthlessly attacked im sure by all of the top 5 kingdoms straight oow. It will be a battle to see who can poach and gain as much off these "overgrown warring kd" that pop up. It will just turn into an age of "Warring Kingdom Whack-a-mole" One comes up, BONG, you knock them back down ruthlessly and decisively.

Warring kingdoms are going to need to be prepared to retaliate, and I don't think 3 day eowcf is going to give them that time (lets not pretend that fort matters here, because they will get vultured right through fort, almost preferrably because going into a fresh fort will mean they are more likely to not retaliate).

saw it, but that's been going this direction for a while now so *shrug* nothing we can do about it. I have said many times in the past that land bonus for war wins only punishes kingdoms that do not land drop, for all others it simply means they need to drop land more and faster. Land bonus has the opposite effect of what they think/claim it does. It increases land drops and land for gold/honor deals.
No amount of eowcf can prevent being vultured after war by kingdoms that sit and grow and pump all age.
Forcing growth on a kingdom that comes out of stress situation and has to already fix their provinces adds insult to injury.

[Deathlyric]

Easier to uphold 20 players then 25. Big reason Why you see more off them.

[Bart of Sparta]

Id rather have 40 player KDs so everyone that wants to play for me could actually get a spot.

one thing that could be done is reduce the significance of numerical superiority. or sumfin!

Also dont know whats harsh about growing then losing size for warKDs. they got many things at their disposal to deal with it.

1. Diplo.
2. Eat wave then CF.
3. Agree landdrop.
4. Let friendly KDs raze u down before eow cf ends.
5. Threaten with FSU to get cfs, and sign non-compete for land

[Slayerviper]

is it me or has no one said anything about 9/0 UD's at OOP going to rape everything? Lets just ignore the 15/1 leet as that has been discussed.... how about them 40-50K offence UD's out of protection... I'm liking barts suggestions even more.

[jmiedema]

Id rather have 40 player KDs so everyone that wants to play for me could actually get a spot.

one thing that could be done is reduce the significance of numerical superiority. or sumfin!

Also dont know whats harsh about growing then losing size for warKDs. they got many things at their disposal to deal with it.

1. Diplo.
2. Eat wave then CF.
3. Agree landdrop.
4. Let friendly KDs raze u down before eow cf ends.
5. Threaten with FSU to get cfs, and sign non-compete for land

I think the main issue with it is that it is further enforcing the "gain lots of honour then let the big kingdoms take it from you" issue we had this age.

From what I could see initially it looks like the new owners want to have Honour crown more of a warring kingdom crown, but with this change, I think we will likely just see top whoring kd's be top honour kingdoms again.

It's literally going to be a race of the whoring kingdoms to try and get hostile to a kd that just exited eowcf to farm them out. Whoever can attack faster and get hostile to a kd to claim "hostile with X:X" the most times will likely win land crown.

Just warring kingdom whack-a-mole, taking their honour while they're at it.

[jmiedema]

is it me or has no one said anything about 9/0 UD's at OOP going to rape everything? Lets just ignore the 15/1 leet as that has been discussed.... how about them 40-50K offence UD's out of protection... I'm liking barts suggestions even more.

That is better than the avian 100% 11/4 leet army how?

[Avenger]

That is better than the avian 100% 11/4 leet army how?

You seem to think 11/4 elites without horses is great. Offense is a lot worse compared to human/undead/orc.

[Slayerviper]

That is better than the avian 100% 11/4 leet army how?

as mentioned throw in horses and once a UD hits once it will have 15/1 leets with horses so yah... Avian can only train so much leets oop... and they have - gains so yah.... :)