Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: Are we idiots?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Vegas
    Posts
    715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kempion View Post
    I don't think its really a shell game as much as it is left up to us to figure the mechanics out. That's how exploits are found anyway. Like I said, on another thread, the walls probably have a base of 10% per level added to fortification range. The damage doesn't seem to be increased from what I've seen.
    It can't be 10%, I'm figuring it is more like 2-5%.
    ~Success without the possibility of failure is meaningless.~

    Queen Daisuke

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Here. We call this place Ohio
    Posts
    2,104

    Default

    My guess was based upon most of the other in-game modifiers.

    It could just as easily be 5%.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Vegas
    Posts
    715

    Default

    Well, Catapult base and max range is 2250, and they can solo lvl 7s without loss.

    If the walls account for 5% range per level, then I figure towers on a lvl 7 npc should be about 2210. What remains to be seen is if they can do it with 8+ as well.
    ~Success without the possibility of failure is meaningless.~

    Queen Daisuke

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Local Group.
    Posts
    321

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EvNoob View Post
    In defense of those who were mistaken about the change in battle mechanics:

    Hundreds of players woke up to find that a significant percentage of their ballistas had been destroyed. So, yeah, there was a lot of confusion and frustration because people did not know what was going on. Adding to this confusion was that there was no word whatsoever that UMGE had made a change to the game. The latest official word from them was from a post several days earlier about increasing the range of rockfalls, which wasn't causing the losses.

    Also, keep in mind that the explanation that range had been increased based on tower level came out several hours after these boards lit up, and after people were exchanging theories on what was going on.

    So I don't fault the community at all for getting some of the theories wrong and some of them right, especially when even running an experiment risks a lot of your troops.

    Hindsight is 20/20. Anyone can read a patch release's notes after it went out and say, "Of course that's what it is." But trying to figure it out when getting the data risks hundreds or thousands of your own very expensive troops is a completely different ballgame.
    Yes I do agree that it is frustrating for players to lose their ballistas.

    However I was on the forums the whole morning of the fiasco and witness the developments.

    All I can say is this.

    There was NO EXCHANGE of theories whatsoever.

    A couple people made a post that ballistas died because they run into walls... the dumbest theory imaginable and EVERYONE agreed with that theory and that it was dumb.

    However they did not accept it as a theory but as a fact and used this "fact" to say that the developers are retarded for making ranged move when in fact the only place where ranged moved were in the players minds.

    Like I said, I ran an experiment to test out this "fact"... attack a valley of pikeman with warriors and a few archers and it wasnt risky at all... I was able to disprove this "fact" for myself by losing oh maybe 200 warriors?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Here. We call this place Ohio
    Posts
    2,104

    Default

    I can't have any sympthy for players who lost 10 million ballistae because I know what was needed for them to accomplish this feat.

  6. #16

    Default

    It wasnt that they ran into walls. It was the fact that Ballistas that used to stay out of the range of towers, were now getting hit by towers, so someone assumed, wrongly, that the ballistas had to be moving closer.

    Instead we learned the the towers had gained range. But either way it isnt so much that the mechanics changed, I fell they needed too personally. Its the way it was done, with no advanced warning, and even the patch notes didnt get released till hours AFTER the change, instead of days before as it should have been done.

  7. #17

    Default

    I wasn't really a part of any of the claimed "fiasco" so I don't really care much about it either way, but I will say this: It's cool when someone has 11 posts because you can see everything they've ever posted on the forums easily. You, Andante, never posted anything at all about theories or counter-theories. Yeah, great, you ran an exercise to yourself and never told anyone about it. Hence you don't count. Others in a short period of time attempted to explain a new phenomenon lacking any information except their battle reports.
    Yep, they got it wrong.

    To me, idiots are the ones that can't let things go like this after it's done, and the parties involved have amicably moved on accepting things as they are. A smaller subset to be sure.

  8. #18

    Default

    What this patch proved is, the alpha power grinders are no better than the 'noobs'. One bad day and they were on the forums emo rage quitting. Stupid? No. 0 patience, 0 tolerance most of all, anti social. I have yet to encounter a mighty alliance in the top 100 alliances. There have been alliances with 5 or 6 very powerfull players and a following but to show me 100 people with active membership and equal devotion? No. The hypocracy is through the roof.

  9. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pokey View Post
    I wasn't really a part of any of the claimed "fiasco" so I don't really care much about it either way, but I will say this: It's cool when someone has 11 posts because you can see everything they've ever posted on the forums easily. You, Andante, never posted anything at all about theories or counter-theories. Yeah, great, you ran an exercise to yourself and never told anyone about it. Hence you don't count. Others in a short period of time attempted to explain a new phenomenon lacking any information except their battle reports.
    Yep, they got it wrong.

    To me, idiots are the ones that can't let things go like this after it's done, and the parties involved have amicably moved on accepting things as they are. A smaller subset to be sure.
    QFT. +1 to Pokey.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Local Group.
    Posts
    321

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by pokey View Post
    I wasn't really a part of any of the claimed "fiasco" so I don't really care much about it either way, but I will say this: It's cool when someone has 11 posts because you can see everything they've ever posted on the forums easily. You, Andante, never posted anything at all about theories or counter-theories. Yeah, great, you ran an exercise to yourself and never told anyone about it. Hence you don't count. Others in a short period of time attempted to explain a new phenomenon lacking any information except their battle reports.
    Yep, they got it wrong.

    To me, idiots are the ones that can't let things go like this after it's done, and the parties involved have amicably moved on accepting things as they are. A smaller subset to be sure.
    Nice way of indirectly stroking your epeen

    To me, idiots are the ones that overreact to things they dont understand and the parties have looked back and admitted how idiotic we all acted. A smaller subset to be sure (because I'm superior to you!!11!!)

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
  •