W1 Discussion - Mods please read

DeletedUser

Guest
Kilroy your previous posts opens with the comment that W1N are predominantly the ones moaning, so yes you did say it.

Wrong. I said it was predominently W1N members posting on here declaring that they are experiencing apathy, nothing more. Next.

Your idea is like making a faster man in the olympics run with weights to slow him down so that others have a chance. That to me makes no sense in a competition based game. That's why I made my comments.

I was simply airing my views, but since you insist on making an ordeal over it all, I am happy to oblige. It strikes me as odd how you wish to improve the world, and then criticise me for offering a suggestion to make it more challenging. If you have no intention of entertaining propositions on new idea's, then why make this thread? I simply proposed a solution to make it more challenging, which is what W1N members appear to want . . . but of course, this makes it an 'anti-W1N' post (cue the rolling eyes :icon_rolleyes:)

It is no secret you fly the anti-W1N flag and it shows within your posts.

True, and I do not deny that, but I fail to see quite how I have let that show in my posts, and furthermore, if I had, so what? Can we not debate without resorting to derogatory comments? As far as I recall, W1N have a selective recruitment process, so essentially anyone not in W1N might not be too keen on them, agreed?

Can you honestly say that cheaper nobles And the world closing is bad for w1?

Please quote where I said it was.

Kilroy
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Thank you Tracey for the clarification. Just bad timing made things look the way they are.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
No, I am not playing World 1. Since it was a discussion on the settings and how things could be improved, I do not see this as being justification why I cannot comment on this thread.

Kilroy
 

DeletedUser6603

Guest
May as well close this thread now, Tracey has made it pretty clear what is and isnt going to happen.....
 

DeletedUser

Guest
My idea to improve the game would be the following

1. That no new starter barbs are produced on this world.

2. If a player quits the game and his villages go barb the villages are then deleted.That way the tribe loses the villages but others can't mop them up and it doesn't leave a load of internals to be taken to keep a tribes K 100% theres.

To keep on growing players would be forced to noble

a. the declining number of original barbs left in the world.
b. forced to do what the games about take villages from other players.

kutusov.

My other pet hate is fakes these should have to contain larger numbers of troops to match the target they are aimed at.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Cheaper Nobles are fine and will quicken the pace of the world at the appropriate time.
Messing with any other setting just messes with the world.

Now the world is closed the pace will pick up once all the 0 village players disappear and the one village player vanish.

The only other change I would support would be the removal of troops when players delete... after all the account has gone, then all their troops should just go too... this would stop the stacked last village referred too in a previous post.
 

DeletedUser1942

Guest
Cheaper Nobles are fine and will quicken the pace of the world at the appropriate time.
Messing with any other setting just messes with the world.

Now the world is closed the pace will pick up once all the 0 village players disappear and the one village player vanish.

The only other change I would support would be the removal of troops when players delete... after all the account has gone, then all their troops should just go too... this would stop the stacked last village referred too in a previous post.

Id rather the troops in big barbs werent religeous. That way, you'd still have to lose troops for it - but it wouldnt be too bad and would be easily rebuilt.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Like Luke say's discussion is always good and brings a topic out for open debate.
This worlds been open for 19 mths - There have been plenty of opportunities for many players to extend their account's, in numerous ways.
Now we have reached the point of closer of the world to new registrations, those players who have not taken up the available Opportunities cannot expect to be given special advantages now.
A limitation on nukes would provide a greater challenge for W1N to use fakes and such, rather than brute force when battling smaller players
This game with all due respect is not all about W1N - Kilroy

It will be very interesting to observe the changes in the next few months, this worlds had many interesting twist's and turns.
I also agree cheaper nobles will be advantageous in speeding the world up.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Limiting nukes?

Yeah.......lets try that and allow the already turtled up tribes to turtle up even more!

I saw reports of 9 villages or so scouted a few days ago.........80-100k foot troops, 7-10k hc and 3k cats with a pally in each village! Yes.....lets limit the amount of nukes we can send at the villages so it will take ummmmmm 100 nukes over 100 days to break 1 village......yes.....excellent idea!

Cheaper nobles makes so much more sense!
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Just thought I would raise this point which occured to me to see firstly if people agree, and secondly whether it effects things.

We all know, the larger you get compared to your enimies, the easierit gets to beat them (excluding morale). This is because if you have twice as many villages you can do twice as much in production. You may argue that the increase price in nobles you have to mint more coins, but you still are producing more resources after you've paid for the noble. Hopefully none of that is news to anyone, and is accepted. (unless I've overlooked something)

There the issue occures is any advance given to all players, such as greater resources, is greater for larger accounts. For instance 2 times production in resources is worth a lot more to a larger account when they recieve an extra x amount of resources overall comared to the y amount smaller players recieve x>y *

Now if you lower the price of nobles it is the same as increasing the worth (or amount) of resources that can be spent on coins and as I've shown this benefits the larger people more.

_______________________


This is always going to be the way because any benefit now that is a multiplier widens the deviation between two tribes. That's the first bit out of the way. The second bit would be whether or not this should effect how the game is changed, as it can be argued that the top tribe should recieve this benefit as it's the top tribe and thus naturally does. In fact, if we were to assume all players were the same, and so W1N will win numericall, then it just speeds up the process.

Anyway, just something I thought I would raise to keep in mind. My own view isn't against a lower noble cost, just I think this need to be kept in mind so it isn't lowered too much and people are aware of the extra benefit larger tribes gain.


EDIT: It must also be said that any negative multiplier (like an increase in noble costs) would hurt the bigger tribes more.







* The maths is as follows if you think I've made it up. Assuming all villages produce maximum amount (or any amount as long as it's the same) W1n would recieve X amount of resources extra 2x 32487 x (3x2400)- 1 x32487 x (3x2400)= X = 233906400 extra resources (In words that's 2x the resources in each village - the original resources in each village) extra resources where as T4H (their nearest competitors) recieve 2x 20550 x (3x2400)- 1 x20550 x (3x2400)= 147960000 = Y. Meaning w1n would recieve 85946400 extra resources.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
Meh, UK1 became boring when W1N + CHE!!! merged. That's what killed the excitement in the world.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I didn't know Carol Vorderrman played TW? :icon_razz:

Love you booner! Although I thought you would be more excited over the young boys that play this game than Carol Vorderrman, who knew?:icon_wink:
 

DeletedUser5942

Guest
As an outsider I would say that limiting the amount of Nukes a player/tribe can send defeats the purpose of the game. It's initial premise is to gain territory/villages. If you restrict that, then what is the point? Also, I would say to the mods that the .net community has been going for longer than the .co.uk community and therefore has a larger number of players. Applying the same rules to the different domains is inherently unfair.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Can I make an awesome suggestion?

How about the mods let us have a January Sale? From 1st Jan - 31st Jan Half price nobles for everyone? Make it a seasonal twist!

It's deffo the most excellent idea ever......fact.
 

DeletedUser589

Guest
Can I make an awesome suggestion?

How about the mods let us have a January Sale? From 1st Jan - 31st Jan Half price nobles for everyone? Make it a seasonal twist!

It's deffo the most excellent idea ever......fact.



Agreed!!!
 

DeletedUser1942

Guest
Surely Half price nobles would benefit everyone though, not just bigger players.

Think of how quickly ORC could gobble there remaining barbs up if nobles were cheaper?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Surely Half price nobles would benefit everyone though, not just bigger players.

Think of how quickly ORC could gobble there remaining barbs up if nobles were cheaper?

:lol: Quite, they'd effectively help people from all sides of the rankings.
 
Top