Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: The Evony Arms Race

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,521

    Default The Evony Arms Race

    or: The Ultimate Futility of Unlimited Troop Numbers

    Recent events have once again highlighted the ultimate flaw in this game. Anyone who has reached endgame knows what it is and many have given up playing because of it.

    That flaw is the fact that there is no restriction placed upon the size of your army, other than how much food it takes to keep them fed. I doubt that the developers ever foresaw the situation arising where troops would be counted in the millions and food consumption would also rise to the many millions an hour. For anyone it becomes a daunting task to maintain a standing army of many millions of troops, but because you know or suspect that your enemy has many millions of troops, you feel compelled to follow the same path, or risk being destroyed by superior numbers.

    It was once thought that an army of X number defending a city would be unbeatable and that would be the end of the game. Much work has been done on developing advanced tactics to counter any size or composition of defending troops. Congratulations to those players who have taken the time and effort to develop those strategies. The fact remains that all these counter measures involve sending huge numbers of sacrificial troops to chip away at defending troops and wear them down. Ultimately all this has done has fuel a new round of the arms race.

    Some players found it just too daunting to keep feeding an ever expanding army and have left the game. Some of them gave their account details to somebody else in their alliance, so that their efforts would not be a total waste. This is against the rules as written but was never policed. So this led to multi accounting as a strategy and on newer servers it became a strategy that was common from the very start. Once again, it was not policed, even though it was against the rules.

    The next development was the rise of the bots. I suspect that bots have been around for quite some time, in one form or another, but because there was no policing it became more blatant and more widespread. I even suspect that there may be some who use a mixture of all the illegal (against the rules) strategies to develop far beyond any normal players reach.

    It is not my intention to condemn or admire any strategy that is against the rules. It is simply my intention to highlight what is the ultimate flaw that lies at the heart of the game. It is my hope that somebody from Evony will read this and see the point I am trying to make, take it on board and perhaps think about a solution for Age II.

    All strategies lead to ever increasing army sizes. It is an arms race without end because there is no limit to the number of troops a player can have.
    Casual players reach a stage where the task of keeping up in this arms race becomes too daunting and stop playing. Those who continue to play will continue to develop strategies to keep increasing troop numbers, both within the rules and outside the rules.

    A look at the older servers shows maps covered in black flags, with a few player cities scattered around. It is quite comical when you think that in the introduction to the game you are told that one of your goals is to defeat the barbarian hordes and bring civilization to the land. It's funny because in the end, the maps contain more barbarian cities than player cities by a ratio of up to 20:1.

    In reality, armies of the time period the game is set in were never very large and were ultimately limited by the size of the city they came from, or the area that city could control. This is the major flaw in this game. There is no limit to the size of the army you can build, as long as you can find a way to feed it.

    I am not trying to denigrate the game. It is what it is. I am hoping that the developers will see this flaw for what it is and find a solution for Age II.
    PEACE

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    My home is in the Netherlands
    Posts
    209

    Default

    True words!! I hear you,
    and may the game designers have a good read here
    You think you know it all

  3. #3

    Default

    I have a different opinion of the root of the problem. I see the root of the problem not being the size of the army, but the amount of resources that are being thrown around due to NPC production. This endless supply of large amounts of resources that can be obtained with very little effort is the cause of the problem, in my opinion.

    The risk/reward curve for attacking NPCs is unbalanced. The rewards are way too high, considering there is zero risk.

    The marketplace resource price, troop upkeep, and wars have not been able to bring balance back to the game.

    Attacking NPCs needs to come with greater risk, and/or less reward.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zbest View Post
    I have a different opinion of the root of the problem. I see the root of the problem not being the size of the army, but the amount of resources that are being thrown around due to NPC production. This endless supply of large amounts of resources that can be obtained with very little effort is the cause of the problem, in my opinion.

    The risk/reward curve for attacking NPCs is unbalanced. The rewards are way too high, considering there is zero risk.

    The marketplace resource price, troop upkeep, and wars have not been able to bring balance back to the game.

    Attacking NPCs needs to come with greater risk, and/or less reward.
    I tend to disagree, mainly because it has already been tried to nerf npc farming and that simply led to the development of new strategies. There was also an outcry at the time that perhaps stopped any further nerfing of npc's.
    Paying players and/or those who operate outside the rules would still find ways to keep larger armies, forcing other players to try to find ways as well.

    If army sizes are limited, having too many resources on hand becomes a problem as it makes you a more desirable target. It would remove the pressure to constantly farm npc's and put the emphasis back onto battle strategies. Making players work harder to stay competitive is, in my opinion, counter-productive and would just lead to a greater rate of player fatigue and drop-out.
    PEACE

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodri View Post
    or: The Ultimate Futility of Unlimited Troop Numbers

    Recent events have once again highlighted the ultimate flaw in this game. Anyone who has reached endgame knows what it is and many have given up playing because of it.

    That flaw is the fact that there is no restriction placed upon the size of your army, other than how much food it takes to keep them fed. I doubt that the developers ever foresaw the situation arising where troops would be counted in the millions and food consumption would also rise to the many millions an hour. For anyone it becomes a daunting task to maintain a standing army of many millions of troops, but because you know or suspect that your enemy has many millions of troops, you feel compelled to follow the same path, or risk being destroyed by superior numbers.

    It was once thought that an army of X number defending a city would be unbeatable and that would be the end of the game. Much work has been done on developing advanced tactics to counter any size or composition of defending troops. Congratulations to those players who have taken the time and effort to develop those strategies. The fact remains that all these counter measures involve sending huge numbers of sacrificial troops to chip away at defending troops and wear them down. Ultimately all this has done has fuel a new round of the arms race.

    Some players found it just too daunting to keep feeding an ever expanding army and have left the game. Some of them gave their account details to somebody else in their alliance, so that their efforts would not be a total waste. This is against the rules as written but was never policed. So this led to multi accounting as a strategy and on newer servers it became a strategy that was common from the very start. Once again, it was not policed, even though it was against the rules.

    The next development was the rise of the bots. I suspect that bots have been around for quite some time, in one form or another, but because there was no policing it became more blatant and more widespread. I even suspect that there may be some who use a mixture of all the illegal (against the rules) strategies to develop far beyond any normal players reach.

    It is not my intention to condemn or admire any strategy that is against the rules. It is simply my intention to highlight what is the ultimate flaw that lies at the heart of the game. It is my hope that somebody from Evony will read this and see the point I am trying to make, take it on board and perhaps think about a solution for Age II.

    All strategies lead to ever increasing army sizes. It is an arms race without end because there is no limit to the number of troops a player can have.
    Casual players reach a stage where the task of keeping up in this arms race becomes too daunting and stop playing. Those who continue to play will continue to develop strategies to keep increasing troop numbers, both within the rules and outside the rules.

    A look at the older servers shows maps covered in black flags, with a few player cities scattered around. It is quite comical when you think that in the introduction to the game you are told that one of your goals is to defeat the barbarian hordes and bring civilization to the land. It's funny because in the end, the maps contain more barbarian cities than player cities by a ratio of up to 20:1.

    In reality, armies of the time period the game is set in were never very large and were ultimately limited by the size of the city they came from, or the area that city could control. This is the major flaw in this game. There is no limit to the size of the army you can build, as long as you can find a way to feed it.

    I am not trying to denigrate the game. It is what it is. I am hoping that the developers will see this flaw for what it is and find a solution for Age II.
    True that.

    I can see the beginning of the end of Evony
    Lord Naraquend,
    Prinz of NAFTA16 (formerly of the CPO1, Civony Protection Order)

  6. #6

    Default

    I disagree. I think the developer did foresee the problem of near unlimited troop numbers and that it was what he intended from the beginning. I think the problem is that as the troop number increases you are forced to commit more time into feeding them. Note, i mean time, not strategy, which is supposed to be the key component of the game. This gives rise to the incentive for players to cheat by using multiple acct's etc.

    I do want to note that I do not think the bots should be cheating/bad. I do not personally use one, but before this i played final fantasy online where they would actually have you make macro's so you wouldn't have to press a gazillion buttons at one time. I've also known other people who use java script etc for other things so I'm familiar with the idea of bots. I do not believe that they should be cheating/bad b/c they should not be able to do something that people cannot in a game such as this. If it gets to the point where they can give more than a minor advantage then I think it is a flaw with the game. However, I see no reason that people with more information/knowledge should not be able to benefit, to some extent, from something such as bots.
    Last edited by yodaz; 11-11-2009 at 08:08 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Have you checked that box in your closet lately?
    Posts
    2,898

    Default

    many good points within the OPs post, i highly doubt the developer intended for there to be millions of troops in a city otherwise the sendout limit in the rally point would be much higher and the prod rate of farms and boosts of the food type valleys (lakes swamps grasslands) would be much much higher
    135 gray rep 158/200 rep points Rep me if i helped!! thnx!!

    OUT OF BASIC YAAY!!! Now I'm in tech school

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yodaz View Post
    I disagree. I think the developer did foresee the problem of near unlimited troop numbers and that it was what he intended from the beginning. I think the problem is that as the troop number increases you are forced to commit more time into feeding them. Note, i mean time, not strategy, which is supposed to be the key component of the game. This gives rise to the incentive for players to cheat by using multiple acct's etc.
    I can't see any sane programmer designing a game becomes such a task of work that players are forced to either cheat or quit. Then again, I have seen quite a bit in Evony that beggars belief.
    PEACE

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodri View Post
    or: The Ultimate Futility of Unlimited Troop Numbers
    I never really understood the unlimited troop numbers either.

    One aspect of the game I never understood is why troops don't consume cottage space? They have to sleep somewhere, don't they?

    In reality, your cottages should dictate the size of your army. Your cottages can hold troops, idle population, or resource field workers.

    Barracks dictate the # of troops you can train simultaneously, but your overall army size should be limited to the size of the population your cottages can hold.

  10. #10

    Default

    I completely agree with the OP, following his line of thinking would lead to a rise in strategy and a decrease in tedium. Make the game about who is the best strategist and who works well with their alliance, not who can throw the most time at it. He is also very correct about the rise of bots. They initially came out just to queue buildings and have progressed so far it is now blatant cheating. Personally I believe the only reason there is a crusade against bots now is because they made it an effective medal farmer. Best way to draw attention to something is to cost someone money. Add building queues to the game cap the army size (thanks OP) and then crack down on botters.

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
  •