Print Page | Close Window


Printed From: Illyriad
Category: News & Announcements
Forum Name: News & Announcements
Forum Description: Changes, patch release dates, server launch dates, downtime notifications etc.
Printed Date: 07 Aug 2020 at 23:13
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 -

Topic: 23FEB15 - BEYOND 10 CITIES
Posted By: GM ThunderCat
Subject: 23FEB15 - BEYOND 10 CITIES
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 17:50

To settle or capture your 10th city your population in 9 cities needs to be more or less maxed out. However the dramatic demand for growth continued in population requirement beyond the 10th city making an 11th city or beyond increasing levels of impossible.

We have changed the population requirements to recognise that there is a maximum population a city can achieve, so going beyond 10 cities is now possible. However, the step between each new city does increasingly demand a greater jump in population.

The population required graph for settling cities now looks like this:

With the requirements changing as follows:

CityPrev Pop RequiredNew Pop Required
1                            -          -  
2                     450            450
3           2,000        2,000
4           5,000         5,000
5     10,000       10,000
6     20,000   20,000
740,000     40,000
9 130,000130,000
11515,500          263,550
12       1,130,250          294,550
13      2,461,800          326,550
14       5,329,350359,550
15   11,473,700393,550
16   24,581,250428,550
17   52,434,400464,550
19 - 539,550
20 -           578,550
21 -           618,550
22 -           659,550
23 - 701,550
24 - 744,550
25 -           788,550
26 -           833,550
27 - 879,550
28 -           926,550
29 -           974,550
30 -      1,023,550
31 -      1,073,550
32 -     1,124,550
33 -      1,176,550
34 -      1,229,550
35 -      1,283,550
36 -      1,338,550
37 -      1,394,550
38 -      1,451,550
39 -      1,509,550
40 -      1,568,550
41 -      1,628,550
42 -     1,689,550

Posted By: Llannedd
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 17:54
This is by far the best of the recent crop of updates/tweaks.

Posted By: Alfred
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 17:54

Heh, This is a decent wave of updates, I retract my cynicism and give praise :P 

Posted By: Mumbling
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 17:58
Effective.... immediately?

Posted By: Lagavulin
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 18:26
This is the first update I am quite nervous about.  I think it is a bad idea.  I hope I am wrong.

Posted By: Marquesta
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 18:38
With all these changes, I would be eternally grateful if you could make our alliance forums editable, beyond delete and reply. It would make our lives in training alliances a bit easier. 

Whether tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing, end them...

Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 18:44
Wow.  And I still don't even have 10 cities ...

Posted By: Aurordan
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 19:02
Uh... wow.  

Anyone got the math on just how many cities you can actually get to under this system? 

Posted By: Gossip Boy
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 19:07
assuming 30k pop/ city, it should limit somewhere between 17-19

[08:34]<Rill> when you've just had part of your brain taken out, you lack a certain amount of credibility
<KillerPoodle> I can say anything I like and it is impossible to prove or disprove

Posted By: Diva
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 19:13
now senses are  OVERWHELMED Wacko, sitting still with this update is not an option.
hehehe.. TO THE MOON and beyond.. oh wait, that is AoA.

"Um diva.... you are sort of acting like a .... diva...." - PhoenixFire

Posted By: dittobite
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 19:15
Great.  +1 on this change.  At what city limit will famine management now be rewarded?  Is it still 10?

Posted By: GM ThunderCat
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 19:23
Originally posted by dittobite dittobite wrote:

Great.  +1 on this change.  At what city limit will famine management now be rewarded?  Is it still 10?
Still awarded at city 10

Posted By: Epidemic
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 19:57
Not sure about this update, perhaps if the issues with permasitting and gifted accounts were dealt with as well i'd feel more comfortable with facing one player with 40 cities.

Posted By: PurpleRain
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 22:33
Guys, it took me best part of 5 years to get 10 towns...what are you trying to do to me...for like a month i have been so proud of myself for reaching ten lol :(

Posted By: Alcie
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 23:31
For the short term I love this.. I have wanted to make a new city for ages and now I can at least work towards one or more.

I also suspect this more than any of the other current updates will bring in prestige buying which should help support the game.

In the longer term I do feel nervous that it will bias the game more towards super powers caused by prestige. Getting up towards 20 cities (or 40 >.<) is very unlikely without a serious amount of prestige. And once you have 20 cities you would be a potential powerhouse. Of course, as Epidemic alluded to, you can already basically do this by abusing the sitter functions.

So I have mixed feelings.

I kind of wish the curve was as just posted for 11 and 12 towns but sped up insanely, so that 15 or so was max and that it got harder and harder towards 15. 40 cities just seems a bit ridiculous.

Posted By: Stukahh
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 23:40
A single player can essentially control up to 120 cities now if they are motivated and willing to spend big bucks.  40 Cities for main, 40 cities for alt and 4 sat accounts with 10 cities a piece.

I think that is a game changer.  3 or 4 motivated players could do alot of damage.

I don't always drink. But when I do, I prefer the blood of my enemies.

Posted By: Stukahh
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 23:46
This update (in my opinion) is flirting with "pay to win".  I think the consequences of this update will be felt 2 years from now.

I don't always drink. But when I do, I prefer the blood of my enemies.

Posted By: John Louis
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 23:56
Here's a thought:

Maybe some players will absorb (valuable old) cities from sat accounts ('belonging' to alliances) into their main account/alt, now that they can.

This in itself may do away with some sat accounts.

It may help, it may not (some abuse, I guess, is always inevitable).

Lets just wait and see - though I think this is an exciting innovation, and I really like the crafting bonus increases too - finally an incentive to craft weapons which have practical worthwhile bonuses!

Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2015 at 23:58
Umm, yea...this is the end of Illy as we know it. A shame.

Bonfyr Verboo

Posted By: Lwyllyn
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 00:04
I think it's more than just 'flirting' with pay-to-win. Some unintentional consequenses I can see:

1. Some players will use prestige to insta-build their way up, resulting in...

2. The already crowded (and recently expanded) map will explode with these new rapidly-growing cities...

3. Small players will be unable to find a suitable square with an uninhabited 5x5

4. Battles will be disgustingly unbalanced

5. Within a couple of years, the map will be dominated with a dozen or so super prestige-buyers, squeezing the rest of us out.

I think capping the number somewhere can avoid these problems, and maintain a balance.

Posted By: Dungshoveleux
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 00:06
I think that the amendments will create more opportunity for wars and disagreements.  But the Greek city states still screwed over the Persians.  I expect the same in Illyriad.

Posted By: Albatross
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 00:43
Although you see City 42 in the distance, that gentle curve is (as usual) carefully pitched beyond 10 cities. 23-27 is realistic maximum for most people, before dropping back population to exploit those cities to their fullest.

Here's a deliberate over-think, just to get you thinking about it...

The numbers will bite in the 20s, and you'll really struggle to make it past 26, without making your cities full of useless buildings. So, there's a clear growth phase when you can't really maintain useful armies/diplo, then when you've had enough of sitting on your hands watching the builders, there's the militarisation phase, giving up the ability to grow population for further cities.

If you want a massive military alliance as an end-point, then those alliances will need to organise their members to make this work: you can't have everyone militarised and growing beyond 24 cities each.


Posted By: Albatross
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 00:46
Further, the recent growth changes are designed to make uncomfortable crowding a realistic prospect. Looking ahead in 1-2 years, this could be the spark for conflict. It's something to be embraced as interesting, rather than something that should be petitioned for avoiding.


Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 01:06
This is going to make food sov way more valuable. Friction over ideal spots will increase.

Posted By: hrandjt
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 01:10
Some of the updates over the past few days have been great, it's been good to see the devs take an active hand in balancing the game, but this... My first reaction to this was really negative. After taking some time to think about it properly I still hate it, this is awful.

The game was well balanced, with the ability to trade off between population, sovereignty capabilities and taxes. This blows all that out of the water, making population king and massively increasing the power of long time players and the super rich. Also, the population to city curve now makes no sense.

Finally, it's a massive kick in the teeth to all the long time players who chose to take the hit from exodus and move to the Broken Lands, I'm glad I'm not one of them.


Posted By: jcx
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 03:15
oh yeah! big players can instantly go up to 20 cities in one account!

Disclaimer: The above is jcx|orcboy's personal opinion and is not the opinion or policy of Harmless? [H?] or of the little green men that have been following him all day.

jcx in H? | orcboy in H?

Posted By: Mr Damage
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 05:04
Originally posted by Stukahh Stukahh wrote:

A single player can essentially control up to 120 cities now if they are motivated and willing to spend big bucks.  40 Cities for main, 40 cities for alt and 4 sat accounts with 10 cities a piece.

I think that is a game changer.  3 or 4 motivated players could do alot of damage.

What are you accusing me of now SB?Angry

Posted By: Mr Damage
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 05:04
Like the change anyways, thanks Devs

Posted By: Whakomatic
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 05:57
I am not sure it is reasonable to jump on the "it's bad" bandwagon just yet. What percentage of Illy players have 10 cities? How long did it take for them to get that many? Why do you instantly assume people are suddenly going to have 40 and destroy the game. The sky is not falling people. 

Posted By: Ammianus
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 11:31
First: I am taking what i can get, actually I have already.

Second: my first impression was  "oh, that's bad, it will reduce open space and probably unballance the game"

But there are less than 5% of the players with 10 cties who can exploit this really quick and probably less who have already the requirement for the eleventh.
While i agree with some of the above concerns, I think the developers have a chance to see the effect and can in 6 month probably top of at around 15 to 18 cities, if there is any need without doing much harm to those who have then built already.

So I suggest accept the change for now and see how everything developes.

Qui secundos optat eventus, dimicet arte, non causa.

Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 12:14
The sky might not be falling, but this is still a major change to Illyriad. The 5% of players in question happen to include some of the most powerful accounts in the game. As they grow to 15 cities and beyond, their already mighty influence on tournaments and wars will make a corresponding leap. There will be interesting days ahead.

Posted By: Etherea
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 14:18
I saw a statement in Global Chat that I honestly think will have more bearing on the outcome of this addition more than any other. That statement was "Maybe these changes will breath some new life into Illyriad"
   I think that "new life" is going to have a lot to say on this particular update as old players that got bored with doing the same thing over and over again hear of this and come back to the game to build more cities, and newer player see the potential to grow big and work harder to catch up.
  This update has the potential to be the doomsday update that some are seeming to look at it as, but it also has the potential to be the one update that has the most impact on spurring slow players to play a better more active role in Illyriad.
   For me, I will lay my hopes on the latter. We have a lot of hungry new players out there that will see this potential and work hard to get there. If we all want this to be the engrossing developmental addition it can be, I say bring it on, and lets see the new players be all they can be. If we all do that, this can be the best addition yet.

Posted By: Epidemic
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 19:44
Lets get realistic here, if you don't buy prestige it'll take you about 10 years to get to 15 cities, if you buy prestige, lots of prestige, it'll take you under a year to get 40 cities. That should basically end the debate.
Devs are looking for new ways to create revenue, which is a good thing, this just isn't a good way of going about it. This is pay to win.

Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 20:12
Pay to win is when I can pay 35c to instantly finish 4000 infantry, or pay 65c to erect an indestructible shield that will halt all attacks for 4 hours. Illyriad still isn't anywhere close to pure pay to win. While this will allow players who spend considerable prestige to achieve more cities faster, that has ALWAYS been the case in Illyriad. You still can't purchase resources directly. Anyone with a big alliance (or lots of friends) could already capture cities, be supplied with basics, and speed them to completion by spending real money. I have done it, and so have many others. This update just increases the scope from 10 cities to 15-20 or maybe more.

Posted By: Alcie
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 23:10
For good or bad, this update will substantially increase the gap between old and new players and between non-prestigers and prestigers.

Old: some people complained about older players having all the 'super food sov' spots in Elgea.
But: it could be argued that food sov didn't matter 'that much'... anyone could still get to 10 cities with work.

Now: food sov is 'that important' now. better sov spots translates to more possible cities. Unless a way is added for players to (with hard work) terraform more cities, the players who grab the biggest food sov spots will have a substantial and permanent advantage.

Old: non-prestigers got to 10 cities in 2 or 3 years. prestigers got to 10 cities in a few months
But: at the end, they both had 10 cities so the gap could mostly be closed by hard work

Now: more prestige translates to a larger top number of possible cities and the gap can never be closed by non-prestigers.

Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 23:15
More cities = More siege targets.


I don't really have an opinion about whether this is "good" or "bad."  I don't automatically think "more is better," but I don't necessarily think it's worse either.

The number of troops each city can support still has around the same limit, and whether it's 2 players with 20 cities each or 4 players with 10 cities each, it seems like the math works out around the same.  Spreading the same amount of brain power around more cities might even result in decreasing marginal returns.

Maybe, maybe not.  I don't know.

It'll all work out.

Posted By: Hora
Date Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 23:40
... Well, combining all those facts posted...:
Though it was already possible to speed up to 10 cities within months, or maybe 1 year, only 5% did actually go there and not all of them used prestige...
so no huge game changer at all, just a way to keep those 5% busy.

And imagine how much it will hurt for a 20 towns player to loose one city after changing all the towns back to military construction... just drop some stones into the right direction... Evil Smile

Posted By: Count Rupert
Date Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 00:31
With the ability to buy prestige scrolls now, I'm not sure the prestige gap will be as wide as is being forecast.

Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 01:15
The ability to buy prestige scrolls with gold is going to favor old accounts, and accounts collected by sitters. IF--and it is a big IF--the devs aggressively police password sharing violations and sat accounts, then I think prestige buying will be less fashionable then it was when the announcement was first made.

Posted By: GM Rikoo
Date Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 01:30
Originally posted by Brandmeister Brandmeister wrote:

The ability to buy prestige scrolls with gold is going to favor old accounts, and accounts collected by sitters. IF--and it is a big IF--the devs aggressively police password sharing violations and sat accounts, then I think prestige buying will be less fashionable then it was when the announcement was first made.

I can promise you that there are fewer things that get my blood boiling (and banhammer going) than password sharing, etc. 

Trust me or not, up to you. :)


Illyriad Community Manager / Public Relations /

Posted By: Alfred
Date Posted: 26 Feb 2015 at 11:34
upon a little thinking,
Would it be possible to lower ( minorly ) the population for 10 Towns. It was a nightmare just to acquire 9 Towns the first time I played! 
I do love my 5 food squares. The higher numbers will always be beyond me if I survive that long anyway.

Posted By: Anjire
Date Posted: 26 Feb 2015 at 16:51
Hmm...with this new change someone could feasibly obtain 42 cities on one account.  

30K avg = 18 cities
31K avg = 21 cities
32K avg = 23 cities
33K avg = 25 cities
34K avg = 27 cities
35K avg = 29 cities
40K avg = 39 cities

42 cities = avg pop of 41,209 

Feasible, albeit extremely difficult but what feather in one's cap to accomplish.  

Good Luck!

***Changed the # of cities forgot a crucial step in the copy/paste on the spreadsheet  LOL

-------------" rel="nofollow">

Posted By: Dungshoveleux
Date Posted: 03 Mar 2015 at 18:41
The posts below show what seems to be possible by concentrating on food sov.
There are a lot of assumptions and of course, military sov considerations are not accounted for.
It is am exercise in seeing what is theoretically possible **on average**.

Posted By: Dungshoveleux
Date Posted: 03 Mar 2015 at 18:42
A little explanation is required:
SQ = number of sov squares
L1 = research points per level of sov
L5 = research points for level 5 sov
L5C = cumulative total of research points for level 5 sov
%5C = cumulative food % per level 5 food sov on a typical 5 food square
DIFF = level 20 library + allembine research = 1,113 research points / hr MINUS the L5C column
What this table shows is that under the current sov system, you can only sov 14 squares to level 5 sov and still break even on research points.  This is important because it shows how far you can boost food production in order to grow cities past the level required for the NEXT city.  So food production can be boosted by 70% before research points have to go negative.  Negative research points / hr require a steady influx of books in order to prevent research points stored falling to zero at which point sov levels downwards to bring research point expenditure into line with research point income.

1 10.0 50.0 50.0 5% 1063.0
2 10.0 50.0 100.0 10% 1013.0
3 10.0 50.0 150.0 15% 963.0
4 10.0 50.0 200.0 20% 913.0
5 14.1 70.7 270.7 25% 842.3
6 14.1 70.7 341.4 30% 771.6
7 14.1 70.7 412.1 35% 700.9
8 14.1 70.7 482.8 40% 630.2
9 20.0 100.0 582.8 45% 530.2
10 20.0 100.0 682.8 50% 430.2
11 20.0 100.0 782.8 55% 330.2
12 20.0 100.0 882.8 60% 230.2
13 22.4 111.8 994.6 65% 118.4
14 22.4 111.8 1106.4 70% 6.6

Posted By: Dungshoveleux
Date Posted: 03 Mar 2015 at 18:43
Getting beyond 10 cities is difficult.  Many players do not appreciate this because they make their first few city choices before they **really** understand how you need to play the game **for the long term**.
And I am not being sanctimonious here - I made these mistakes myself!

Choosing to site a city on a 5 food location will ultimately CHOKE OFF YOUR GROWTH.
It will limit the maximum number of cities you can achieve in the game to quite a few less than if you had exclusively used 7 food locations.  

City Buildings consume food and food consumed = the size of your city.  The sum of the sizes of your cities is compared to the target which if reached, allows you to settle or capture another city. 

Now for the complicated table:
cities = the number of cities you can have
required = the number of points (food expenditure) you need to qualify for the 'n'th city. For example: to qualify for city number 3, cities numbers 1 and 2 need to add to 2,000 points.
marginal = points required for the next city.  For example: once you have 2 cities, you need to add 1,550 points to qualify for city number 3.
av to get nxt = the number of points each existing city needs on average in order for you to reach the total points required for the next city.  For example: You need 2 cities, each of 1,000 points on average in order t oqualify for city number 3.
max fd 7p = the maximum amount of food which a city on a 7 food plot location can generate before accounting for food sov. Each food plot produces 2,014 food.  A level 20 flourmill adds +40%.  The best food spell adds +8%. So 2,014 x 7 x (1+0.40+0.08) = 20,865 food / hr for one city.
av fd sur/def = average food surplus or deficit.  Compare the  previous two columns to find out how much "spare" food on average is available in each of your cities.  For example: If you have 8 cities, in order to qualify for city number 9, each of your 8 cities must be on average 16,250 points in size.  Since the maximum food production (excluding sov bonuses) is 20,865, each city has ,on average, a food surplus of 4,615 points.  The more cities you have, the higher the required size on average for the next city.  Soon you WILL NEED FOOD SOV in order to get to the next city.  That is where the next 2 columns are relevant.
% food sov reqd = the % food sov required to make up any deficit.  For example: in order to qualify for 10 cities, each of your 9 cities will require 36.1% food sov (5,085/14,098). Note that food sov % is calculated with respect to the base food production before flourmill and before spell bonuses.
5% sov sq = the number of level 5 5% sov squares required to achieve enough food production to break even.  For example, to get city number 10, each of your existing 9 cities will require on average 7.21 sov squares.
And as we go down the table we eventually see that 19 cities require 13.6 sov squares to qualify for city number 20.  The previous table has already demonstrated that 14 sov squares is the maximum sustainable number of sov squares under current rules so city 21 is not sustainable long term without external deliveries of books and food.

cities required marginal av to get nxt max fd 7p av fd sur/def %fd sov reqd 5% sov sq
1 0 0 450 20,865 20,415 0.0% 0.00
2 450 450 1,000 20,865 19,865 0.0% 0.00
3 2,000 1,550 1,667 20,865 19,198 0.0% 0.00
4 5,000 3,000 2,500 20,865 18,365 0.0% 0.00
5 10,000 5,000 4,000 20,865 16,865 0.0% 0.00
6 20,000 10,000 6,667 20,865 14,198 0.0% 0.00
7 40,000 20,000 10,714 20,865 10,151 0.0% 0.00
8 75,000 35,000 16,250 20,865 4,615 0.0% 0.00
9 130,000 55,000 25,950 20,865 -5,085 36.1% 7.21
10 233,550 103,550 26,355 20,865 -5,490 38.9% 7.79
11 263,550 30,000 26,777 20,865 -5,912 41.9% 8.39
12 294,550 31,000 27,213 20,865 -6,348 45.0% 9.00
13 326,550 32,000 27,658 20,865 -6,793 48.2% 9.64
14 359,550 33,000 28,111 20,865 -7,246 51.4% 10.28
15 393,550 34,000 28,570 20,865 -7,705 54.7% 10.93
16 428,550 35,000 29,034 20,865 -8,169 57.9% 11.59
17 464,550 36,000 29,503 20,865 -8,638 61.3% 12.25
18 501,550 37,000 29,975 20,865 -9,110 64.6% 12.92
19 539,550 38,000 30,450 20,865 -9,585 68.0% 13.60
20 578,550 39,000 30,928 20,865 -10,063 71.4% 14.28

Posted By: Dungshoveleux
Date Posted: 03 Mar 2015 at 18:44
There was a similar table here based on 5 food plots but I've binned it.

The main point being that large numbers of cities require a very lop sided strategy that concentrates solely on food sov to the exclusion of useful military sov.  A point well made below.

Posted By: Mona Lisa
Date Posted: 04 Mar 2015 at 22:21
Well...  some flaws....   very few vets build all squares to SOV 5, for a whole host of reasons.  Mainly, when you eventually desire to switch to a military economy, the payout for lvl 5 military buildings is horribly inefficient compared to lesser SOV levels.  As a general rule, I will only build SOV 3 squares, but 20 of them...  and them go to SOV 5 only on a very high (13+ ) food dolmen, typically 1 per city. So for SOV based food.. it would be 19 lvl 3 farms + 1 lvl 5. when I switch to full wartime economy, i will still only build a lvl 3 troop building on the lone SOV5 square....

The ability to easily switch between a war and peace city build pretty much limits you to this, given the pain and suffering it is to claim and declaim SOV.  ...  and yes.. when you need to raise an army quickly, you will want to swap all your SOV to military production ...  and no one is going to be able to pay for 14 x lvl 5 troop SOV without have endless streams of vans supplying basic res to pay for it . . .


Posted By: Dungshoveleux
Date Posted: 04 Mar 2015 at 22:28
My example is just theory MONA LISA.  It doesn't take account of real world play where military and food sov is interchanged.  It is merely an exercise in determining how far one can get. I deliberately left out 6 food sov plots and dolmens because they are not guaranteed.  At most a 6f sov square adds 1%, a 7f sov square 2% and a 15f dolmen 10% so if you are lucky, in your 14 sov squares you might have the equivalent of 17 level 5 5% food sov squares.  But this is on average and you need this in EACH city if you use the above table as a guide.

I would be happy to be proved wrong.

And I do believe that the fact that the table goes further than 20 cities means that more as yet unreleased content will allow further progression when people get to 20 cities.

Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 04 Mar 2015 at 23:43
I use 8 Farmstead V on a few cities. If I switch to military, I just tear down the four corners and rebuild sov 3. Or all 8 if my troops really took a beating. It only takes one day to go from Military I to II on the outer 12 squares, and another 36 for M-III.

Posted By: Diva
Date Posted: 05 Mar 2015 at 03:51
Originally posted by Count Rupert Count Rupert wrote:

With the ability to buy prestige scrolls now, I'm not sure the prestige gap will be as wide as is being forecast.

I so agree with this.. at FIRST I thought the scrolls would be unobtainable.. but playing the market with sales of my items has increased my ability to buy them. I'm not a super sales person, and my cities have gold when troops are down... so not so bad at gold making.

With the changes in some crafting items, harvesters/crafters can go at it and make a market for themselves. The creatures on the land, and rares of skin, gems and herbs... it's there to be gotten and made.

just sayin' can't keep looking at the negative end of the game.. play it, work with it, make suggestions to the DEVS.. if they changed it once.. I'm sure they'll do it again. 

I don't like ALL the changes, I like some of the changes.. 

You can't please ALL the people... yada yada yada... 

"Um diva.... you are sort of acting like a .... diva...." - PhoenixFire

Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03 -
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd. -