Honor overhaul

[octobrev]

Award provinces 25 honor points for each tick they are logged in. Remove 5 points for every tick they are not logged in. Everyone starts at zero and it cannot go below zero. The more they're logged in, the more they are experiencing the game and the underlying mechanics.

[Pillz]

Award provinces 25 honor points for each tick they are logged in. Remove 5 points for every tick they are not logged in. Everyone starts at zero and it cannot go below zero. The more they're logged in, the more they are experiencing the game and the underlying mechanics.

This is better than the idea proposed in the OP, which adds literally nothing to gameplay from what I can see and simply rewards people for every action (on the unspecified list of actions).

Honor is not broken in the least by being easily gathered OOW and farmed by top kingdoms. Honor was not traditionally a resource that top kingdoms had a lot of compared to warring kingdoms because of a number of factors, such as different explore and paradise mechanics as well as the fact that kingdoms used to have (and I might be wrong) more wars on average than the 5-6 I am seeing now.

Additionally - the idea that honor can be lost easily but is hard to accumulate isn't true just of honor, but land as well, unless you think being deep chained and losing 90% of your land is radically different from losing the same amount of honor at the same time? You get hit, you lose land and honor. But I agree that honor is more difficult to acquire and the variety of actions that can destroy/take honor make it harder to maintain.

If anything the fact that the honor charts are no longer dominated by war KDs is a good thing, because if top KDs can gain honor OOW so easily from their minimal # of wars then why can't other kingdoms? (oh right, because they're **** but still want a medal)

I maintain that this suggestion of mine which Palem apparently stole the title and spirit of the first line from, is a better suggestion. It doesn't alter the mechanics of how honor is gained, generated, or lost, but it does calcify the rank & bonuses attained through honor so as to minimize whining about 'losing' it and makes honor a mechanic that can be counted on rather consistently instead of something that is comparatively fleeting/temporary and largely dis-associated from land making it hard to reacquire.

Stop advocating for participation charts and bull**** achievements, none of which encourage people to play the game and instead encourage them to isolate themselves in highly constrictive no-progress zones (both in terms of size and in terms of skill).

[Palem]

which adds literally nothing to gameplay from what I can see and simply rewards people for every action (on the unspecified list of actions).

Incorrect

Honor is not broken in the least by being easily gathered OOW and farmed by top kingdoms.

Incorrect

Additionally - the idea that honor can be lost easily but is hard to accumulate isn't true just of honor, but land as well, unless you think being deep chained and losing 90% of your land is radically different from losing the same amount of honor at the same time? You get hit, you lose land and honor. But I agree that honor is more difficult to acquire and the variety of actions that can destroy/take honor make it harder to maintain.

I don't remember saying land wasn't as easy to lose as honor. Thanks for putting completely asinine words in my mouth.

Since you've pointed out that honor is harder to acquire and made your own suggestion regarding the issue of honor bonus instability, I'm assuming you understand, more or less, the actual impacts of losing most of your land and how it's very different than losing all your honor.

If anything the fact that the honor charts are no longer dominated by war KDs is a good thing

I don't disagree. I don't think the charts should be mutually exclusive

because if top KDs can gain honor OOW so easily from their minimal # of wars then why can't other kingdoms? (oh right, because they're **** but still want a medal)

Incorrect. It's because they have leverage over every other kingdom, in that they'll win a war against anyone else, regardless of their skill (assuming they can at least operate as well as a monkey sitting in their seat), by sheer size alone.

I maintain that this suggestion of mine which Palem apparently stole the title and spirit of the first line from, is a better suggestion. It doesn't alter the mechanics of how honor is gained, generated, or lost, but it does calcify the rank & bonuses attained through honor so as to minimize whining about 'losing' it and makes honor a mechanic that can be counted on rather consistently instead of something that is comparatively fleeting/temporary and largely dis-associated from land making it hard to reacquire.

That's amusing, however I fail to see how something that "doesn't alter the mechanics of how honor is gained, generated, or lost" can be considered an "overhaul". Also, I didn't see the need to clarify that the thing I'm posting in the suggestion forum is a suggestion.

There are some forums that I try to make sure I have every thread at least skimmed through, and the suggestion forum isn't one of them. Had I realized there was such a similar thread, I would have likely gone for a title with a little more pizzazz.

Stop advocating for participation charts and bull**** achievements, none of which encourage people to play the game and instead encourage them to isolate themselves in highly constrictive no-progress zones (both in terms of size and in terms of skill).

I'm not really sure how a suggestion that rewards people for using as many of the games mechanics as they can rather than rewarding people for using the same spells, ops, and tactics over and over and over again for every single war isn't encouraging people to play the game. However I'm even less sure how your suggestion to pin honor titles and rewarding people with bonuses they shouldn't have because they couldn't hold on to the right amount of honor isn't a participation trophy.

Feedback: 5/10
Trolling: 6/10

[Pillz]

Incorrect


Incorrect



I don't remember saying land wasn't as easy to lose as honor. Thanks for putting completely asinine words in my mouth.

Since you've pointed out that honor is harder to acquire and made your own suggestion regarding the issue of honor bonus instability, I'm assuming you understand, more or less, the actual impacts of losing most of your land and how it's very different than losing all your honor.


I don't disagree. I don't think the charts should be mutually exclusive



Incorrect. It's because they have leverage over every other kingdom, in that they'll win a war against anyone else, regardless of their skill (assuming they can at least operate as well as a monkey sitting in their seat), by sheer size alone.


That's amusing, however I fail to see how something that "doesn't alter the mechanics of how honor is gained, generated, or lost" can be considered an "overhaul". Also, I didn't see the need to clarify that the thing I'm posting in the suggestion forum is a suggestion.

There are some forums that I try to make sure I have every thread at least skimmed through, and the suggestion forum isn't one of them. Had I realized there was such a similar thread, I would have likely gone for a title with a little more pizzazz.



I'm not really sure how a suggestion that rewards people for using as many of the games mechanics as they can rather than rewarding people for using the same spells, ops, and tactics over and over and over again for every single war isn't encouraging people to play the game. However I'm even less sure how your suggestion to pin honor titles and rewarding people with bonuses they shouldn't have because they couldn't hold on to the right amount of honor isn't a participation trophy.

Feedback: 5/10
Trolling: 6/10

"Incorrect"

That is exactly the impression your suggestion gives.

"Incorrect"

Then it was always broken. It has been common for years for whoring kingdoms to be ahead in whore early on because of all the hits they make. Warring KDs would overtake them eventually but mostly due to the sheer volume of wars, or due to honor farming (Grace vs. Seasons) or farming out (Playboys vs. ED), and always because they intentionally kept themselves small (FREE) via landdrops and intra hits.

Additionally, the server had enough kingdoms and provinces that size / positioning was really entirely up to you based on whether you opted to grow or not grow and for how long and to what size, there were always kingdoms at every size in plenty.

It makes perfect sense that with fewer and fewer kingdoms having fewer and fewer wars and there being less and less manipulation of size/honor that whoring kingdoms would be able to compete for honor by volume of hits. And of course when two whoring KDs then war, there is loads of honor involved.

Does it sort of suck? Not really. Everybody agrees that warring KDs are scummy about how they win anyways, and it never really proved anything because their wars are largely worthless.

"Since you've pointed out that honor is harder to acquire and made your own suggestion regarding the issue of honor bonus instability, I'm assuming you understand, more or less, the actual impacts of losing most of your land and how it's very different than losing all your honor."

Sure, and I don't see what the **** achievements have to do with it.

"Incorrect. It's because they have leverage over every other kingdom, in that they'll win a war against anyone else, regardless of their skill (assuming they can at least operate as well as a monkey sitting in their seat), by sheer size alone."

Nothing stopping other KDs from being that size except for skill (which both makes it impossible for them to reach it and impossible to win wars once there).

Bad kingdoms need to accept they are bad kingdoms and get by. I mean I have literally played in ghettos for 18 1/2 of the 20 ages I've been back, minus the few I forget to create a province. I have none of the complaints about top KDs that others seem to voice to loudly and on repeat. If a KD is good it will compete, if it isn't, why is it crying it can't get a crown?

"Also, I didn't see the need to clarify that the thing I'm posting in the suggestion forum is a suggestion."

There is a lot of **** posted here I was hestitate to call suggestions.

"I'm not really sure how a suggestion that rewards people for using as many of the games mechanics as they can rather than rewarding people for using the same spells, ops, and tactics over and over and over again for every single war isn't encouraging people to play the game."

Because theyre already carrying out those actions?

"However I'm even less sure how your suggestion to pin honor titles and rewarding people with bonuses they shouldn't have because they couldn't hold on to the right amount of honor isn't a participation trophy."

I think of it more like amnesia or nightmares applied to honor? Not exactly but as the post said it wasn't by no means methodically planned. The idea behind it is more to increase buffs, which I said I am a fan of in another thread recently. I think that as the age progresses everybody who does manage to achieve X rank should get that bonus, to distinguish players and introduce incentive to hit for max honor or keep provinces in war from attaining X rank, etc.

I wouldn't call it a participation trophy in juxaposition to yours because I'm not incentivizing new actions (funding dragons and slaying dragons?) with an achievement system and honor is still a resource you can lose & gain like it is now, just under new parameters so as to diversify gameplay choices and buff.

Additionally, I think the biggest issue with land vs. honor is that honor is an immediate reward whereas land is, barring WS, delayed. So you can be hit down severely and receive land, but not honor, and the new honor you gain from attacking again is going to be lost when your fresh acres are stripped.

Our suggestions are similar enough that I think you may have plagiarized badly.