
Originally Posted by
stepfaster
I keep seeing where people are complaining of the different aspects of a transition between Age I and Age II yet i keep seeing its about the heroes for age I and for age II its the low upkeep. I am a everyday player and spend 10 hrs or more a day playing, its a game i love and gives me something to do while i watch my newborn baby girl. I have spent maybe $100 on my one acct and have made Duke, i have a 15 m burn at a single city and roughly a combined burn of 25m between them all. I am not comparing my troops to some on here, i know i am outmatched. But i feel that a player willing to dedicate that much time should be able to be a larger force on a server if willing to do so to feed them. And thats the advantage i feel i lose with age 2. I know there are flaws between all options that evony is faced with:
1) Force the servers to change upsets those who prefer age I
2) Voluntary Acct transfers can leave players/alliances at a disadvantage
ex: a super player w/ a current 100m burn transfers to server1 of Age I and so does a top player of a newer server w/ only a 20m burn. This is only amplified if a entire alliance does so, the effect would be a quick endgame of a single alliance quickly sweeping through the server.
3) Create new servers in which players are mad for wasting the time/money they have already spent on a Age I server.
My op is evony made a great choice with what they have decided so far, the ones who are moving to a new age 2 server would have done so anyway but those who love the current setup would have been forced to quit.
Feel free to hate on my op if u want but i havent seen that op on the farming effect in the discussions on age 2.
Bookmarks