Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Smaller Armies........Bad/Good/Neutral

  1. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleM View Post
    500k is not a lot. More about 1mil-10mil would be some where average.
    I just came up with those #s from thin air, the real #s would have to be tweaked alot to have good game balance.
    I have yet to see a burn out that rivals the Skyline
    Heres a video of a bad burnout

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=lB2qsj4Tzm0

  2. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SkylineR34VSpec View Post
    With a variable food cost, once you reach a certain point you honestly could not build any troops...................I cant see people trying to build troops past the point when it costs 1m food for a archer, for example. So farming your life away would only help till you hit that point. But my idea wasnt to get people to stop farming so much, just to lower army sizes while keeping the advantage farmers and spenders had, at the same ratio. In this idea I feel the advantage is still intact.
    yes this is true, good idea +rep since i forgot on my first post.


    Quote Originally Posted by SkylineR34VSpec View Post
    Didnt think of that...................If evony actually enforced their rules, alt accounts would not exist, or at least not be sooooo ungodfuly common.
    But this idea would also take away the advantage, people who farm alot have................so maybe i scratch this idea...............Well maybe not, the people who farm alot typically have many cities...........so if they have many cities then they get to build more npcs than people who dont have many cities. so there is still an advantage but i dont feel the advantage ratio is the same i feel with this idea the advantage ratio is cut nearly in half.

    Just thinking while i type on this post.
    maybe if you had player owned NPC's [like you can OWN then with you name on them and everything], other people could attack YOUR npc's but it would show as them attacking one of your valleys, and maybe you are restricted somehow when farming other players npcs, what i meant by attacking your npcs is capping them to get close to you. could come to be a good idea if some of the programmers actually looked and considered threads on this forums, but no offense attended, seems like the people who made evony dont ever even look at these suggestions

    would be VERY cool if they added some more things to do in age 1 instead of only upgrading age 2 servers. i know they have made some small improvements to bugs and such but nothing other than that except a hammer... which is on NO use to players on older servers where they dont need to build? lol but good try hope evony makes another buck off it

    how about some level 12 and high npc's implemented in age 1, making things WAY more interesting
    just thinking out loud sorry for going off subject Skyline

  3. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by None4You View Post


    yes this is true, good idea +rep since i forgot on my first post.




    maybe if you had player owned NPC's [like you can OWN then with you name on them and everything], other people could attack YOUR npc's but it would show as them attacking one of your valleys, and maybe you are restricted somehow when farming other players npcs, what i meant by attacking your npcs is capping them to get close to you. could come to be a good idea if some of the programmers actually looked and considered threads on this forums, but no offense attended, seems like the people who made evony dont ever even look at these suggestions

    would be VERY cool if they added some more things to do in age 1 instead of only upgrading age 2 servers. i know they have made some small improvements to bugs and such but nothing other than that except a hammer... which is on NO use to players on older servers where they dont need to build? lol but good try hope evony makes another buck off it

    how about some level 12 and high npc's implemented in age 1, making things WAY more interesting
    just thinking out loud sorry for going off subject Skyline


    HMMM actual player owned npcs.....im going to have to think on this one, get back to it after i sleep on it
    I have yet to see a burn out that rivals the Skyline
    Heres a video of a bad burnout

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=lB2qsj4Tzm0

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,343

    Default

    Not a fan of these proposals....mainly because I'm a biased SOB who's in favor of the massive army system, even when outgunned. I tend to shoot for modest armies of around a mil troops or so per city so your proposals would mess with my way of life and I don't like change....unless its lower upkeep or faster movment speeds lol. In the end if you are good with tactics and know what you are doing you do not need a massive army to do well only takes a few troops to fend off many many times the number you have.

    I'MMMMMMMM BAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK!

    norr is basically a lesser version of shep
    hes not as awesome as me, but hell do root (nod)

  5. Default

    Thank you for putting in an opinion and informing me of why you dont like it...............some people just dont like change
    I have yet to see a burn out that rivals the Skyline
    Heres a video of a bad burnout

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=lB2qsj4Tzm0

  6. Default

    Man i honestly thought this topic souls spark more convo. Were the right people not one when this was on top? Or was I just mistaken?
    I have yet to see a burn out that rivals the Skyline
    Heres a video of a bad burnout

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=lB2qsj4Tzm0

  7. #17

    Default

    Any modification with an attempt to reduce troops will only promote more multi accounters, legally or not.

    You will have several players who will attack 1 players the same time every day, a tell tale sign of multi accounters.

    What I am tryng to say is that players will adapt to any modification.
    I have already been in a server where 4 players out of 10 were consistently attacking me with the same time frame share by these 4 supposed players.
    Clearly, even the best of friends don't attack at the same time, everytime, every day. How soo? because in reality, every players have different routine in life, even my best friend will not join an attack with me 2 days in a row.
    Players in the same alliances will encounter different time zone, another reason most alliance members don't consistantly attack the same time every day.


    The idea looks good, but due to the nature of this game, and players keen sense of adaptation, you will always find your self up against larger armies, and battle that seems against your favor.

    But good suggestion is always a good way to improve this game, directly or indirectly.

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
  •