View Poll Results: Which of these issues of the game needs to be fixed? (choose as many as you want)

Voters
498. You may not vote on this poll
  • Capping a level 10 NPC is too easy!! (easier than level 9 even! HA! Warriors? Randomize the troopS!

    75 15.06%
  • Capping a level 10 NPC is too POWERFUL!! (wow, a near maxed city in one shot? Ridiculous)

    89 17.87%
  • NPCs have too much!! (all other resource aspects are super weak, Taxes and Fields mean ziltcho)

    115 23.09%
  • All NPCs/valleys are too simple!! (rando the troops! Ex: heavy on archer / or cav / or swordsman)

    68 13.65%
  • Building X lvl NPCs narby is too simple!(server gets filled & blocks legit enem/newbs for tiny cost)

    149 29.92%
  • Archers are too strong!! (makes all other units weak)

    164 32.93%
  • Too easy to protect range units with rainbow/Darwin troops!! (1 of each unit stops whole platoons?)

    224 44.98%
  • Abandoning a capped town is to devastating!(how can vaporizing all a players work instantly be fair?

    138 27.71%
  • Swapping heroes for mayor minimizes build times too much!! (why even HAVE a "mayor")

    102 20.48%
  • Cavalry can capture towns way too quick!! (no reason to ever send anything else)

    76 15.26%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 3 of 28 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 272

Thread: The anti-exploit, pro-nerf topic. Cheese, and fixing it.

  1. #21

    Default

    i do not cheese in your sense of the word yet i own my neighbour hood. 30min to coordinate and i can have a 200k man army knocking at your door beeb ignoring the fact i am in ur alliance.

    how they wanna build their cities is their poblem, but armies should need more than just food. they need space too camp, wood for fire, stone to sharpen weapons etc. they need more up keep and there should be a limit of troops per city. sorry suig
    cy...101

  2. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adine View Post
    I like alot of the ideas in here but there are a few which i either disagree with or think should be added .


    1) I dont think armies should have an upkeep of population this would in effect make the armies TOO small and instead i would propose a resource upkeep on top of the food dependant on unit type (archers,balista would require wood upkeep Swords and pikes would require iron upkeep etc ) this would of course require you to have more resource feilds devoted to the proper upkeep materal too .
    1 A) i also STRONGLY disagree with the workforce idea for the same reason

    2) I think another way to stop the baracks spam would be to put a limit on how many can be built in the first place . lets say 10 baracks limit in any given city for agument sake
    Granted at the current levels of population it wouldn't give much scope for massive armies, and everyone wants to be able to build one of those.

    However with the current exploits those who have the time to spend on this game are able to build ridiculously over-powered forces. This is what I'm trying to combat.

    Simply increasing the population given by a cottage would allow larger armies with the pop requirement in place.

    It would also place a finite size on armies - players would then eventually be forced to think strategically rather than simply brute force of numbers. I don't see this as a bad thing personally speaking.

  3. #23

    Default

    ouch dis man lol

  4. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stantree View Post
    i do not cheese in your sense of the word yet i own my neighbour hood. 30min to coordinate and i can have a 200k man army knocking at your door beeb ignoring the fact i am in ur alliance.

    how they wanna build their cities is their poblem, but armies should need more than just food. they need space too camp, wood for fire, stone to sharpen weapons etc. they need more up keep and there should be a limit of troops per city. sorry suig
    cy...101
    Hi Stan

    Precisely - I am not exactly weak by regular standards and can summon a force in the region you're mentioning and I do not use Barracks cheese either (although from sheer necessity have succumbed to barbarian farming cheese).

    If the creators want to see armies in the millions - which by the forces required to take a Barbarian Level 10 it is possible they do want to see - there ought to be methods that make sense and are attainable by the 2-3hr a day player to do.

    Of course we are also overlooking the other side of the coin - that they did want a sensible ceiling on forces, as is seen by the Rally Spot limitation. I believe this is more what they wanted to see, tactical use of large forces, not exploitative use of oversights in game design to make tactics non-sensical in favour of vast numbers.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    140

    Default

    I rly like some of the ideas from Anti-Cheese 2 like everything from b) to g) this would have a significant impact on the game and a positive one in my opinion.

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beeblbrox View Post
    You don't want to play a game unless you know of a cheesy exploit that gives you and a bunch of others a massive advantage over the majority?

    I doubt I'm not the only one who wouldn't be sorry to see them all leave. Bye bye.
    exploit? since when is looking at the current situation, seeing that lumber is the most expensive, and therefore making the most of it an exploit. Take economics, its called maximizing.

    If you were in the real world, and going to start up a business. You see that track shoes sell for 100$, sandals 10$ and regular shoes are 50$. The demand for track shoes is highest (aka like lumber) and the build time and cost are cheaper than the other 2 (which is true), what kind of store would you open?

    You would sell 90% track shoes, and some regular shoes and some sandals.

    So you think that all the players who were smart enough to maximize the current system should be penalized for taking the time to unbuild stuff that took forever to make, and now make them break down that and rebuild it as it was before?

    Don't get me wrong, I agree with most of yourideas. But to change something so drastically would be unfair. Everyone can build ltos of sawmills and sell it, heck, this would even the prices out and fix the problem! Not our fault they aren't smart enough, or just didn;t put enoough thought into the idea.

  7. #27

    Default

    yeah but if u coodinate with say 5 cities say a 200k army cap city holding limit you could ("could") take out a lvl10 barb. this can be attained my barrack qeues by adding to it every time ur pop regen, and would be barely sustainable.

    thing is take the roman empire for example. massive migrating army they don't need cities they lived off victims. thats wat war is. living off pillaged resources. if an army can carry the plunder they can still hold it when they get home. thus negating your spoil thingo. i think the only restiction is the unit cap per city say 20k troops per TH lvl.

    this is logically viable and would make things work better. also it would knock out the point of cheesing unless u suicide ur army regularly, then your just a tool.

  8. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by euki7 View Post
    exploit? since when is looking at the current situation, seeing that lumber is the most expensive, and therefore making the most of it an exploit. Take economics, its called maximizing.

    If you were in the real world, and going to start up a business. You see that track shoes sell for 100$, sandals 10$ and regular shoes are 50$. The demand for track shoes is highest (aka like lumber) and the build time and cost are cheaper than the other 2 (which is true), what kind of store would you open?

    You would sell 90% track shoes, and some regular shoes and some sandals.

    So you think that all the players who were smart enough to maximize the current system should be penalized for taking the time to unbuild stuff that took forever to make, and now make them break down that and rebuild it as it was before?

    Don't get me wrong, I agree with most of yourideas. But to change something so drastically would be unfair. Everyone can build ltos of sawmills and sell it, heck, this would even the prices out and fix the problem! Not our fault they aren't smart enough, or just didn;t put enoough thought into the idea.
    Then if that's what you have done you have gambled on Lumber continuing to be the most profitable and have sacrificed balance in favour of rampant capitalism providing you with funds to supply you with cash to buy other required resources. And for a long time relatively speaking on this game it has worked.

    Unfortunately the bottom often falls out of markets Heard of the banking crisis? the depression of the 1930's? The economic bubble of the internet? Shall I go on pointing out why that approach is flawed?

    You have a cash crop that is diminishing in value since Iron rocketed. Bad luck chum.

    Sadly this has nothing to do with my post, and is merely a distraction. If you have something pertinent to the points I originally made please make them.

  9. #29

    Default

    also, the unit cap i disagree on. I have for example, about 300k+ units. If i was capped at a certain amount, then soon (when people catch up) everyone would have a similar sized army, and a ton of extra resources that no one would know what to do with. this would force large armies to attack a ton of people (to lose troops so that can build more) Who do you think is going to get targeted first? weak people, (cause you dont wanna lose lots, but enough that you gain stuff and have a minimal rebuild time)

  10. #30

    Default

    Even with the current exploits there is an effective cap anyway. You can only supply your cities with so much food from barbarian cities in a given day no matter how active you are. It's just the current cap is ridiculously extreme to the extent that only 24/7 players can achieve it. I believe they are actually nearing it too (the extreme players that is).

    I'm arguing for game balance. There's a reason why both teams of a football match are only allowed 11 players on the field. A reason why chess is an 8x8 board with 16 pieces each.

    Without some reasonable levels of balance this game becomes nothing but a competition to see who can stand to spend the most hours of their day devoted to it. I'm pretty sure you aren't arguing in favour of this.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •