Age 47 Changes - comments

[carter]

Why is there even a thread for us to comment, insult and whine about when the developers are not 'listening' to us? There were many people who commented that CB and CE should stay and Mystic instead of going over to thievery and no change were done. It is not like there were half as many people who agreed on this idea. No matter how much we input nicely via comments or shout abuses at the developers, hardly any changes get done, including the mystic and merchant personalty.

And I would rather Elf get 4/7 for their leets than 7/4, in order to take up a mystic role proper.

[FireBones]

Strawman! Ad hominem! Non Sequitor!
Now, if you're in a WARRING Kingdom then you obviously will need to update intel, even if that means expending all your mana over a single CB on an Elf Mystic. Now where do you get this hogwash about bottom feeding about?

Currently, if there is a mystic that is hard to CB, you just ask someone with decent wizards to do it. Now if there is a thief that is hard to CB, you just do the same. What's the fuss?

I supplied empirical evidence... you supplied nothing.
I STATED FACTS, you let air loose

And by "Facts" you mean "Assumptions about a new age that explicitly go against what the developers have states.

As someone who chained several gnome attackers to the floor, I know you to be lying.

What part of "OOW" do you not understand? My statement was that as an OOW attacker, gnomes are excellent. That is a true statement. Sure, in war, where anyone can attack anyone, gnomes are more vulnerable..but that is hardly relevant to my point.

Gnomes are easy to make out of any race if you only care about "networth efficiency" you gain a little more NW from the defspecs, but the gnome elite is no more NW efficient than an offspec.

By I hardly count other people paying 25% more NW as "a little more efficient." What you don't seem to understand is that, for most players, far more NW is spent on defense than on offense. Most players have more offense than defense. I realize that is not true for heavy attackers who want to double-tap, but in terms of typical players doing oow attacks [which is what we are talking about here], it is generally true that attackers have fewer attack points than defense...and it is always true (except in all elite gnome armies) that defense costs more nw per point, so networth "spent" on defense ends up being the most significant contributor to total army NW...and total army NW is the biggest contributor to total NW. And gnomes get a huge efficiency bonus on that.

Now to push the point home.
Avian and Human Elites are 1.23 offensive point per NW. Gnome is 1.25 NW offensive point per NW... but gnome needs more elites to make an attack than Avian or Human does... in fact, ignoring build differences, Gnome would need 60% more elites. (8 / 5)
Now, since the Gnome Defense is its elites, and thus their elites are 1.25 defensive point per NW where as human defspecs and avian defspecs are 1 defensive point per NW you can have a +25% bonus to def, but you still need 60% more elites to attack... so you'll have 20% less def.

You are mixing and matching population efficiency with NW efficiency within this logic. You are assuming that two attackers of the same NW will have the same size army, and thus gnome has to spend more attackers, yada, yada, yada. What you are ignoring is that a gnome at networth X will have more land (and hence a bigger army) than someone else at the same NW.

Tell you what: you make an army worth 100k NW that can send out as much attack as possible while keeping, say, 85000 attack points at home [That assumes a 100k NW army belongs to a province with a NW of 170k, and to be "safe" in OOW attacks, you need about NW/2 defense at home], and compare that to the same-sized gnome army leaving the same defense at home.

Pick any reasonable build you want, any race you want, any personality you want, make an army with total NW cost of 100k, see how many attack points you can get while leaving 85k points at home, and my gnome army will totally own it. I know, because I did it this age.

Seriously Now, Storms isn't effective enough as is... and here you're yelling about "going it alone" and "bringing down dwarf shepherds".

Check the clarification. Chastity suspends births. If you don't see how that is a severe obstacle to shepherds in particular, then I don't know know what to say.

I guess on planet FireBones they haven't heard of "It's the beginning of a new bloody age" and are assuming that everyone is going to start with +200% food production. (And also, I guess the people on Planet Firebones don't realize that if I MV your fertile lands I could bring you into starvation).

I thought you were just going to admit your math mistake here...but it sounds like you are honestly trying to defend the need for 9% farms. This argumentation is so weak that I'm not even going to respond further to it.

[FireBones]

Guys, before you whine about SoM being inaccurate, keep in mind that it just means you have to send more thieves. Sending 100 thieves will probably make the SoM inaccuracy 3% or less...and since elites have lower defense than attackers, and most people do not play elite armies, when you actually do the math you'll find that 3% inaccuracy on armies out will end up being about 1% inaccuracy on total defense.

[Deorc]

If i understand things correctly (I've asked for clearification earlier, and is still wainting for it), is that it is the PROPORTION of thieves u send that is important to accuracy, that means that u will get much less acuracy for 100 thieves if u have 10000 thieves than if u have 2000 (because send less percentage of your total thieves). I hope it is not like this (or atleast that this is capped) as I've explained in earlier post... (quote is from Thundergores clarifications)

Q) IF CB (SoT) is random, then how random?
A) It depends on the ratio of thieves you send to the thieves you have.

[Blitz]

no Deorc... it's based on the tpa you send out in thivery operations.

If you are 1000 acres and you have 100 thives.. you send all those you will have less accuracy than if you had 1000 thives and sent all.

So.. in the first case you are sending out 0.1 tpa and in the 2nd one you are sending out 1 tpa.

[beeper]

nice to see someone casted CB on Brian and found what are those programmers doing for next age

[Smalltalker]

I just wanna say one thing, being 35y old playing this game since age 8:

Why is there even a thread for us to comment, insult and whine about when the developers are not 'listening' to us?

And I feel an amazing urge to duplicate this message a hundred times...

[Yuri]

We need clarification on cb being randomized. How is it randomized? How many thieves do we send to get 100% accurate intel? Can we get accurate intel with 2x 1 thief cbs like the old som? How are people that aren't in organized kingdoms with designated intel people supposed to attack or do anything?

We were promised it wasn't randomized and now we find out it will be randomized except for an otherwise worthless race gnome.

[shirtless]

If they are trying to open this game up to more people, then I don't think adding more randomization is a good thing, it increases the barrier for new players while at the same time it really doesn't do anything at the pro level, so I don't see the point.

Pros once they get used to it will just send enough thieves to reduce randomness, and then over-send enough to ensure 100% success, so nothings changed for the pros, other then losing a few more thieves and needing slightly more offense, but that doesn't do much to game-play.

New players on the other hand won't have the experience to know how many thieves to send to get accurate info, and once they do get that info, won't know how much to over-send. So they will fail more or have to over-send by a ridiculously amount, making their provinces much weaker. This creates a major disadvantage to them, and new players don't stick around in games where they are largely disadvantaged. So I don't see the point, are they trying to kill the game by making it only accessible to long time playing pros?

As for the pros, this CB thing is a none issue. They said cb's are 4x easier then Som's. That means even A/Ms with crappy thieves should be able to get a cb on a hardcore A/T after only 3-4 tries. So instead of A/T wasting mana collecting info for the kd so A/M can save it, A/M's are now the ones collecting info. so A/T can save stealth. Just a simple role reversal. And the increased randomization just means more offense needed to break, which reduces offensive power, which is was everyone wanted. People were complaining offense was too strong, well now they've weakened it a bit by forcing attackers to send more.

So none issue for pros, deadly to noobs. Nice way to keep shunning new players.

[Deorc]

blitz - do you have inside information? Or am I unable to understand a simple sentence? It says:

Q) IF CB (SoT) is random, then how random?
A) It depends on the ratio of thieves you send to the thieves you have.

As I understand this the accuracy is proportional in some way to: thieves sent / total thieves you have - I can see no other way of reading the quote above... It says nothing of tpa (which is offcourse important to the SUCCESS of the op), only of ratio sent to total.

[Bishop]

Edit the sodding changes so it doesnt contradict itself. The first post says CB and CE will not be random this age, the third post said CB will be random (absolutely w*nk idea). I want proper confirmation of whether its random or not, ie Thunder, Sean or Brian.

First post was preliminary changes, next one(s)are updated changes. SoT will be random, from 3-25% randomness most likely - depending on the ratio of thieves you send (compared to what you have). The ratio needed for max inaccuracy is not available to us.

edit: gnomes will be 100% accurate on all intel ops.

[mikemit]

Crystal balls have been a staple of the game since age 1.

when a new player that hasnt played for ages comes back, and sees that crystal ball isnt there anymore, they are going to be confused, and most likely give up,,,,

because you guys changed the game too much already....

why are you changes things, = causing more errors

when there are plenty of bugs to be worked on ,,, aside from messing with crystal ball

CB has been here for 47 ages... why are you trying to fix things that arnt broken?

*sigh*

this has to be the worst thing you guys have done to this game.... this is even worse than 2 weeks of downtime and horrendous lag.......


i will have to see how it pans out, but in teh future i predict this is going to cause problems for angel, and pimp.....
not only that but if you start randomizing things as well, i predict i will be seeing alot of "oops something went wrong" pages

This has to be the ultimate game killer....
congratulations sean and brian........ you really ruined this game for me

[pmyraje]

If an old player returns, sees no CBs and immediately gets so confused that they instalt quit then they are hardly a great loss to the game. It takes precious little time to go to the help pr ask in your KD forum what the situation is!

[pmyraje]

Oh yeah,m one mildly annoying thing - Age changes are the most important Announcement at this time so why are there millions of sticky threads in the Announcements forum so that you have to search half way down before we find the thread we are all interested in...please make it Sticky!!

[tedybear]

CB is 4 times easyer to take than a SoM.
considering that u could take a 10 thief SoM to any A/T in maximum 10 tryes, this means that in 3 tryes, u can take a 10 thieve CB.
why 10 thieve? because u can run only 10 thieve and sending all of them means u get BEST CB accuracy.

so, what do we do about the thievery defence? well , either play DW and run HUGE % of WT or go Avian with decent % of WT and Clearsight :P.
having only 10 thiefs means u have A LOT more elites :P