Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 28 of 28

Thread: Homebases

  1. #16

    Default

    just not sure....when i joined the game NAR was already king....maybe in a post reset it would work but if you are wrong....bye bye gewar....If post reset gewar ends up like it is now....and you take away the ability of smaller players and alliance to sneak up on the big boys....nobody will play


    Because NAR is so strong the best part of the game for me has been..working my arse off hunting for jewels for a week or so (and collecting my resources) and launch an attack....I know my chances are slim but it's still fun....I got bored pretty quick w/the going after a smaller city....losing it....going after another...losing it......etc...etc...etc..

  2. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WILDCAT1976
    just not sure....when i joined the game NAR was already king....maybe in a post reset it would work but if you are wrong....bye bye gewar....If post reset gewar ends up like it is now....and you take away the ability of smaller players and alliance to sneak up on the big boys....nobody will play


    Because NAR is so strong the best part of the game for me has been..working my arse off hunting for jewels for a week or so (and collecting my resources) and launch an attack....I know my chances are slim but it's still fun....I got bored pretty quick w/the going after a smaller city....losing it....going after another...losing it......etc...etc...etc..
    I was against it first too. But it makes cheating sooo easy.
    And 2500 geos is still quite a lot to strike with.
    But it also makes the game more logic. You'd start with a very small town and wouldn't put all your geo's into troops. You'd just put a minimum in it and keep on saving.
    And no big loss if you lose the city, you just recapture it or another one.

  3. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lukepuuk
    And no big loss if you lose the city, you just recapture it or another one.
    This is what I'm talking about....it's been a long time for you guys have had to worry about keeping 1 city....someone take one of your cities...you got 50 armies on you

    I've probably have had Cork, Ireland 10-15 times....it's a waste of troops....almost everyone in the game is "afraid" to take on NAR so everyone just beats the crap out of each other....end result...NAR gets stronger...


    maybe 5k.......if you have that much it's about time to attack anyway....I just think the 2500 is a bit too low...of course I guess it depends on other changes in the game....

    Lukas...how about a sticky or something keeping us updated to the changes you are putting into affect...and maybe another thread for us to propose ideas...

  4. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WILDCAT1976
    This is what I'm talking about....it's been a long time for you guys have had to worry about keeping 1 city....someone take one of your cities...you got 50 armies on you

    I've probably have had Cork, Ireland 10-15 times....it's a waste of troops....almost everyone in the game is "afraid" to take on NAR so everyone just beats the crap out of each other....end result...NAR gets stronger...


    maybe 5k.......if you have that much it's about time to attack anyway....I just think the 2500 is a bit too low...of course I guess it depends on other changes in the game....

    Lukas...how about a sticky or something keeping us updated to the changes you are putting into affect...and maybe another thread for us to propose ideas...
    You are way ahead. I was giving ideas here, as for now it's still Mickey's game totally . I just ordered the server.
    These are just ideas, and was a reaction to Tuka's idea.
    I don't think its so bad. You just shouldn't be afraid of a big alliance and let them save up geo's.
    I think city taxes should go up so that when you have a city, you can defend it better. And when the army upkeep actually costs you money instead of giving you money, a big alliance will have big expenses also.
    Now a big army was giving you money. I think it will balance out quite nicely really.

  5. #20

    Default

    Though a board with ideas where members can reply on is never a bad idea.

  6. #21
    Senior Member blitzkrieg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    323

    Default

    2500 geos is 33,333 troops............... that's more than enough for 80% of the cities on the map.

  7. #22
    Senior Member blitzkrieg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    323

    Default

    Wildcat - Luke is pigheaded about Heraklion, Greece - ask him how many troops he has lost trying to hold that little city....

    Also timing is everything, I assume when you were trying to hold Cork, was when EU had nearly all of Europe, therefore they had the resources to deal with your style of play. I bet if you tried now to hold Cork (unless there's a Luke-type player refusing to let ANYONE own it), that you would be fine. Eventually when there are more players and more action, there will be a need to add more cities, and as the majority of large cities are already in the game, the added cities will become smaller and smaller, then there will be less competition over smaller cities, but never Heraklion!

    "If at first you don't succeed, stuff it! Try a new city"
    11-12-05 Blitzkrieg.

    Extract from the blitzkrieg book of quotes available in all good book stores .... and a few of the cruddy ones aswell.

  8. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    665

    Default

    The idea at the moment is that almost every city you have, you lose money on. So people saving up their cash are actually being smarter. Only they're not really playing the game, only acting as mindless robots. So the people playing the game, would be wiped out by these persons after a month or so.

    and if the "smart" way to play a game isnt the most fun way, there's something wrong that needs fixing, thats how you create a good game.

    and Luke is right, small steps in creating your "empire" is more natural.

    and dont go NAR bashing, we have some people saving up as well (you'll start noticing this soon). And we're just doing this in the interest of the game, actually that's all we do.
    Never ever ever!

  9. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blitzkrieg
    Wildcat - Luke is pigheaded about Heraklion, Greece - ask him how many troops he has lost trying to hold that little city....

    Also timing is everything, I assume when you were trying to hold Cork, was when EU had nearly all of Europe, therefore they had the resources to deal with your style of play. I bet if you tried now to hold Cork (unless there's a Luke-type player refusing to let ANYONE own it), that you would be fine. Eventually when there are more players and more action, there will be a need to add more cities, and as the majority of large cities are already in the game, the added cities will become smaller and smaller, then there will be less competition over smaller cities, but never Heraklion!

    "If at first you don't succeed, stuff it! Try a new city"
    11-12-05 Blitzkrieg.

    Extract from the blitzkrieg book of quotes available in all good book stores .... and a few of the cruddy ones aswell.

    hehehe...could you send me an autographed version???

    More cities would help.....and what you are saying is true...hell, maybe i screwed up when I put my homebase in Ireland....2,500 probably not a bad mark...sure would like to eliminate the fake accounts...if this can help...go for it

  10. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WILDCAT1976
    hehehe...could you send me an autographed version???

    More cities would help.....and what you are saying is true...hell, maybe i screwed up when I put my homebase in Ireland....2,500 probably not a bad mark...sure would like to eliminate the fake accounts...if this can help...go for it
    I think it can.
    It will solve another problem also.
    Imagine someone having just 1 fake account. Even if it would be seen, theres nothing you can do about it as he can say its family playing.
    Now he can play with 1 account, and save up with another.
    In 2 months he would have more then a 100,000 geos on the other account(count how much with interest he would have in 4 months or more).
    Eventually this would ruin the game as one guy would come out to wipe all players off the board. And thanks to interest he would be undestructable.
    The only thing that could beat him then, is another guy who has been saving up for months.

  11. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    665

    Default

    see, and this is why we need to be able to strike at homebases of people who have no cities. kill them in their homes! trample their eggs (huh?)! take em and study them for research purposes! sell them as bio-weapons!
    Never ever ever!

  12. #27

    Default homebase

    Different than previous posts but still talking about homebases....

    I think if you park outside someone's homebase you should have to pay them unless they are in your alliance. Even if they aren't active you should still hafta pay for the 'sneak attack'....not a huge fee.....like 10 geos an hour or something

  13. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WILDCAT1976
    Different than previous posts but still talking about homebases....

    I think if you park outside someone's homebase you should have to pay them unless they are in your alliance. Even if they aren't active you should still hafta pay for the 'sneak attack'....not a huge fee.....like 10 geos an hour or something
    or would it possible to have an indicator if an army was waiting outside a homebase within, say, 10-20 minutes of a city you own.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •