How about a "non alliance" bonus? (And a few others ideas)
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:23 am
This would shake things up a bit...
How about some sort of bonus for independents - something similar to the "no CO" bonus?
Perhaps also make the nox insurance far more effective for independents vs alliances (but not for one on one battles). Imho it's far too easy for very powerful players to mass/sab out millions of troops/weapons. Of course I realise the way it is now is more like real life, but does it really make for better gameplay? Personally I think it would be a lot more interesting if the "untouchables" at the top were a lot less untouchable.
I think we'd see a lot more one on one action than now, where it gets a bit boring seeing a lone player getting railed on by an alliance of a gazillion power...
Also... we can't raid less than (rank+10)*10. So what makes it ok to farm them? I think the limit should be on everything - not just raiding. But I realise that will probably be a very unpopular suggestion.
Think about it, though. If you wanted to farm or hit somebody who was annoying you but was too low in rank, there would be a lot more skill and risk involved in giving them a slap because you'd have to deliberately (however temporarily) lower your rank in order to be able to hit him, which would leave you temporarily vulnerable to all those people you stepped on, on your way up the ladder. Muhahaha...
Wouldn't it make for a lot more balance, risk, skill and fun than it is now? Where is the pleasure in a 6x ascended, 2 digit rank, crippling a rank 1000 by sheer size alone. Never heard of David and Goliath? A lone sniper can take out the leaders of a 10,000 strong army. A handful of well placed spies can cripple a nation.
The game needs to evolve into not being based on strength alone, before it becomes a few hundred players with 70,000 farms (I'm not sure it isn't already). Did having a BFG in doom guarantee you wouldn't be killed with luck/skill and a pistol?
How about some sort of bonus for independents - something similar to the "no CO" bonus?
Perhaps also make the nox insurance far more effective for independents vs alliances (but not for one on one battles). Imho it's far too easy for very powerful players to mass/sab out millions of troops/weapons. Of course I realise the way it is now is more like real life, but does it really make for better gameplay? Personally I think it would be a lot more interesting if the "untouchables" at the top were a lot less untouchable.
I think we'd see a lot more one on one action than now, where it gets a bit boring seeing a lone player getting railed on by an alliance of a gazillion power...
Also... we can't raid less than (rank+10)*10. So what makes it ok to farm them? I think the limit should be on everything - not just raiding. But I realise that will probably be a very unpopular suggestion.
Think about it, though. If you wanted to farm or hit somebody who was annoying you but was too low in rank, there would be a lot more skill and risk involved in giving them a slap because you'd have to deliberately (however temporarily) lower your rank in order to be able to hit him, which would leave you temporarily vulnerable to all those people you stepped on, on your way up the ladder. Muhahaha...
Wouldn't it make for a lot more balance, risk, skill and fun than it is now? Where is the pleasure in a 6x ascended, 2 digit rank, crippling a rank 1000 by sheer size alone. Never heard of David and Goliath? A lone sniper can take out the leaders of a 10,000 strong army. A handful of well placed spies can cripple a nation.
The game needs to evolve into not being based on strength alone, before it becomes a few hundred players with 70,000 farms (I'm not sure it isn't already). Did having a BFG in doom guarantee you wouldn't be killed with luck/skill and a pistol?