Comments on the changes for age 50 go here please.
Printable View
Comments on the changes for age 50 go here please.
Shouldn't this be in Utopia talk? You aren't really fishing for suggestions lol
ya, i was in two minds, i went with here
How was I speaking too soon? Final changes means final no?
First impression makes it look like one of the most balanced ages with the biggest differences between races & personalities!
Just a lil' concern, shouldn't Elf Elite NW be a little lower?
Did you just suggest making the elite on the best race cheaper? It's imba enough.
EDIT: a-ha now I see, the elite was lowered, interesting I suppose. I gotta run some numbers.
I only wish the undead could start without farms...
*cries*
It's just so beautiful!
Wow Elves troops got nerfed hard. Worst elite by far in the game now.
Avian
* - 25% attack times
* Immune to Fog
* cant use stables
- 30% birthrate
Elite Unit - Drake (8/3, $650, 6.5 nw)
Spell book: Clearsight, Town Watch
avians lost immunity to ambush .. sad .. that's what made them special
Ouch for the elf elite. I thought I'd see another penalty. This sure resets some plans...
my biggest issue with these changes is how ninja it was. elf elites nerfed, avians losing ambush immunity and thieves to $500.
2nd biggest issue is that you had 2 strong races and a race that was quite runnable. instead of bringing the others up to par, you just nerfed the crap out of the ones that are runnable and made everything unappealing.
but seriously, 6/3 elite on elf? at least make it 6/4 so that they aren't completely hosed by losing the ME bonus.
we nerfed the 2 races that had basically 0 penalties, i dont see why this is a surprise ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by vlaM
Remove the +1 def to elf and give them back 7/4 elites.
Would it be remotely possible to know what sort of changes you are planning for science before mid-age?
Sages might be strongly affected and it'd be nice to get an idea before you pick the personna.
"we nerfed the 2 races that had basically 0 penalties, i dont see why this is a surprise ;)"
I think I made my position clear here. 2-4 races that looked good. but instead of bringing the other races up to par, you made everything bleh. not to mention you nerfed said races quite hard. real hard.
would also have been nice to see humans become worthwhile in war.
The nerfs were needed, we had too many races that were OP. Now that we have a balanced playing field, the top 100 charts are going to rotate like musical chairs while we all get busy learning the new tweaks.
EDIT:
Very true, I worry about that now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magn
They can't change the science system mid-age.... It's just when they want to reopen the topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magn
How come not only orc lost the +1 ospec, but noone recieved it at all?
Yes, re-reading the original message, you are right.Quote:
They can't change the science system mid-age.... It's just when they want to reopen the topic.
Thanks for the clarification.
My main beef is that you had one race that was most effective as an a/m and now you're making it more of a t/m race.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bishop
Faery already fills those shoes.
It would make more sense to orient elf to be an a/m race which would involve:
1) Giving them some bonus to magic (which they have)
2) Giving them competitive offensive strength (which they now lack)
I think its a surprise because you took a strength of a race and turned it into a weakness. 6/3 Elite? LOL who would attack with that? It has the worst NW efficiency of all the elites, costs $250 more than an Ospec and has little ability against an Ambush. Elf was looking like a strong attacker, now I wouldn't even consider it as an attacker. Even halfer is now a better attacker without hospitals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bishop
Either way, it makes human and avian look much better.
Just noticed that. Give it to the lousy undead, along with harsher penalties ^^Quote:
Originally Posted by lmtdconv92
@ all who are saying, "Why'd you do THAT!?"
This reminds me of another discussion. Too bad the changes are final, and all your whining does is make you look whiny.
Agreed. Elves are now weaker than Halflings when it comes to military might, and they are still more expensive. Lol. Everyone is going to dump elves and grab a few faeries and humans... perhaps that was the point, though. To make Fae's playable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magn
Well, it is a thread for commenting about it.Quote:
@ all who are saying, "Why'd you do THAT!?"
This reminds me of another discussion. Too bad the changes are final, and all your whining does is make you look whiny.
So, our opinions about the final changes are there.
A comment is a comment is a comment.
However, people keep posting suggestions as if they are going to change things.
I don't like that no personality has a +birthrate%, guess what? It's still gone!
I don't think anyone is whining. We are all pointing out that Elves are now the weakest race, which is an accomplishment since it was proposed to be the strongest. All we are doing is stating the obvious and stating that we won't be touching it with a 10-foot pole. I don't think that is whining. This is the place where they solicited our opinions, and we are obliging them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pestermenot
coboss, if you were whining, it'd apply to you, don't take it all so personal.
The Cleric
* 50% less troop losses
The Warrior
* -15% Your Military Casualties (on attack or defense)
bad bad bad :P ... just bad .. same bonus .. give warriors + 1 off spec .. that would be really cool
too bad these are final changes .. can they be tweaked ? :P
PS : any changes to fortified stance ? :P
I fail to see how Elven military is weaker than halfling military. 5% pop maybe? I think 6 def spec is stronger than 5% pop, and unless we are talking suiciding strategies, when you want to achieve a goal dpnw/dpa or plain defense number, achieving it with 0/6 def specs leaves more room to attacking units.
The 5.5NW is a problem, too much inflation, makes stables almost mandatory for them.
PD: They remember me of the old Dwarves, who used to have "the best elite" 6/6 :')
I haven't been this unexcited about new age changes since..idk, maybe ever. Everything seems flat, faceless and boring, don't see a single race there i'd like to play. I guess this stuff seems very well balanced then tho, gj i guess.
I know for sure that I won't be touching them with a 10 foot pole either! Unless that pole happens to be a spear, then I'll gladly have my avian swoop down and give them a friendly little poke ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by coboss
I know how you feel, I looked them over and at first I was all, "Well nothing really stands out..."Quote:
Originally Posted by hint
Then I came to the same conclusion: Good job! Way to balance things, devs!
lot more balance this age imo...Quote:
Originally Posted by hint
Honestly, pretty balanced. I can see almost every race being considered depending role/situation.
Where did the +1 ospec go? Have +1 dspec, and -1ospec... I guess yeah got rid of -1dspec before.
The sliding scale for UD still general... I mean, significant boost if use all ospecs... makes tempting to see what that boost is but based of 10% elite conversion which is "eh", if boost goes to 20%? Doubled? Or what?
Dwarves now at least more playable and esp with Elf elite nerf (not needing Dwarf/Cleric, although thats a strong combo). Interesting choices now.
I'm sad Avians lost their ambush immunity. They've had it for a long time and it makes sense for flying troops to be safe from ambushes by ground troops.
Nerfing Orcs even more is unexpected. They already took a big nerf by losing the plague and the ability to train elites with credits and getting thievery and magic penalties.
I'd still like a clarification about the Dens boost for Rogues. Do they count as double acres or do you get double the effect (after applying diminishing returns)?
"I'd still like a clarification about the Dens boost for Rogues. Do they count as double acres or do you get double the effect (after applying diminishing returns)?"
this has been clear for days. 10% tds = 20% tds, calc bonuses from there. same for banks.
I also want to know, is it as though you had double the dens/guilds before or after diminishing returns?Quote:
Originally Posted by Landro
EDIT:
nvm
Quote:
Originally Posted by vlaM
from here:
http://forums.joltonline.com/showthr...ential-changes
"x2 as effective on tds and banks, what does this mean: If you have 10% Banks, or TDs, the game will calc as if you had 20%"
Thanks vlaM
Half/Rogue... ???
They should add "Halflings can't be cleric", because that's the last extremity left.
I suppose stuff is more or less balanced, elf will be weak attackers again so less fear of a strong A/M. The big offense attackers (human, avian and orc) now all can suffer from ambushes and have effective weaknesses (t/m, BR) so they are better stoppable during war. Faery still sucks; it only works in packs (a single faery will be taken out pre war), but no kd can afford to have 5+ non attackers. Compared to this age thievery got a boost (rune costs, rogue, much better races for hybrid thieves than for hybrid mage, cheaper thieves), not strange as it felt magic was more powerful this age.
I can't help but wonder about one thing: why ask for community input, yet ignore 90% of the topics addressed. Even a little "We took this into consideration, but won't use it because *****" is nicer than just dumping changes on us, ask for comments and ignore them.