| Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
The_Dude
Postmaster General
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
|
Posted: 23 Jul 2011 at 06:20 |
|
The sitting thing bugs me. :(
|
 |
The_Dude
Postmaster General
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
|
Posted: 23 Jul 2011 at 06:20 |
|
The food thing is about tying unit levels to food...not just gold.
|
 |
WarePhreak
New Poster
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 6
|
Posted: 23 Jul 2011 at 05:55 |
Either I am missing something or else. It was stated negative crop production AND no food supply. You can run negative production on food as long as you don't run out of supply. I suspect the exploit might actually have been with what happened when you hit zero supply with negative production. If it was, then this fix is appropriate as it means something actually happens when you run out of food and don't have any production.
|
 |
KillerPoodle
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1853
|
Posted: 23 Jul 2011 at 05:00 |
|
As long as the one-off penalty is not permanent (e.g. you lose a bunch of build levels which can be rebuilt) then I'm happy.
|
 |
Kamakik
New Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7
|
Posted: 23 Jul 2011 at 04:50 |
|
GM Gryphon, why is food gimped? All of the other resources follows a standard curve, but food is on a lesser curve? Why?
|
 |
Brids17
Postmaster General
Joined: 30 Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1483
|
Posted: 23 Jul 2011 at 03:13 |
|
I think the penalty will likely mean losing building levels. I don't know what thread it was discussed in but there was a lot of talk about it and it was suggested that to balance it, it would de-level buildings.
|
|
|
 |
Starry
Postmaster
Joined: 20 Mar 2010
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 612
|
Posted: 23 Jul 2011 at 03:03 |
|
Thanks for posting GM Gryphon, however, for veteran players than have several old cities "
a very significant one-off penalty to the city that moves " is VERY much a concern. For those that have been here from the start and hopefully helped the Devs to improve the game, a significant penalty does not solve the problem if it involves gold. As I've stated several times, many of us have old cities that are 5 food squares, we don't have huge stores of gold as we've had to make up the food shortage of not having a 7 food square by claiming sovereignty squares. Whatever the penalty, it needs to be reasonable for the "exploit" you are fixing and the consequences that we as players will incur for this taking so long to identify.
|
|
CEO, Harmless? Founder of Toothless?
"Truth never dies." -HonoredMule
|
 |
Anjire
Postmaster
Joined: 18 Sep 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 688
|
Posted: 23 Jul 2011 at 02:42 |
Darkwords wrote:
Its got nothing to do with Math its just what I have.
Simple fact.
|
It has everything to do with math. Simple fact.
If you are claiming that you are getting 90K gold an hour on a 14K pop city, then 34K of that gold has to come from other sources besides tax. The max amount of income from 100% tax that you will have with 14K population is 56K. (unless there is an alternative exploit going on)
With that said, the rest of the income can be made up from trade items but then the disparity between a 5 farm city and 7 farm city becomes that much greater. Since, you can support a higher population which converts to greater production and a greater amount of resources to sell. Using your math a 19K (a typical population a 7 farm city can support) population city would be able to support an army of 122K.
Which is a great disparity between the two cities just for setting up shop on 7 food squares.
This is not an argument against the proposed change (I think everyone agrees that it is a good long term idea), it is merely an argument against the manner in which it is being rolled out. Without an alternative to make 5 farm (starting cities) competitive or at least nearly on par with 7 farm cities then all starting players should look at having their capital city razed the moment they build a second city.
That is the simple fact that math now suggests with this roll out.
|
 |
GM Gryphon
New Poster
GM
Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 60
|
Posted: 23 Jul 2011 at 02:23 |
|
Hi all,
The GM Team had implemented production penalties for running negative food balances. We certainly never intended running a negative food balance to become a City advantage; Especially an advantage that increases with an increased negative food balance. This is clearly unintended behavior, and having recently been made aware of the potential advantages of extreme usage of it, we have deemed it an exploit.
We appreciate that the 1st of August may be too tight a deadline for people to re-balance their cities, and therefore are extending the deadline for this change to take effect to 12:00 server time, the 14th of August.
We do intend- Perhaps in light of this change, with increased priority- To allow players to move their cities to other squares of their choosing and take on the underlying terrain of their new square. This will, however, incur a very significant one-off penalty to the city that moves. We have, in the past, discussed terraforming magic, and do intend to release this in the more distant future.
GM Gryphon
|
 |
HonoredMule
Postmaster General
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1650
|
Posted: 23 Jul 2011 at 02:20 |
Kamakik wrote:
A way to sort of fix the food issue. From what I'm hearing, there is a conflict between Food and Gold. If you lower taxes, you get enough food. If you raise taxes, you don't get enough food.
So I'm going to suggest that we be able to build structures within the city that produce "Consumer Goods". Here is my suggestion:
1) Rename the Carpentry building to a Saw Mill 2) Add: Carpenter, Potter, Tinker and Tile Maker as Structures that convert basic resources into an advanced consumer good resource.
3) Based on the level of your market place, a certain amount of "Consumer Goods" will be converted to gold every hour if they are available.
This allows you to still lower your taxes, but maintain your gold costing units. It also partially negates the importance of the 7 food cities and provides use for extra resources. Yes, you'll have to sacrifice an empty lot (probably the Vault, which in my opinion is pretty worthless) to build this structure. Yes it will take some time to adjust. But everyone will be able to adjust fairly.
|
I like this idea quite a lot. It gives viability to imbalanced locations for a much more palatable tradeoff of losing some building plots.
|
 |