Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 21JUL11 - Mobiles, other
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic Closed21JUL11 - Mobiles, other

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 22>
Author
Starry View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2010
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 614
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Jul 2011 at 22:09
Please say this is not so.  This change penalizes all those players that started playing pre-sovereignty and pre-map expansion  (early in the game).    Yes, we got a free move after the world was expanded  but we had to carry over the current resources.     You are penalizing those that have loyally played this game from the start (or close to it)as most of the cities were built pre-sovereignty and pre-map expansion.    If you were going to address a negative food strategy (yes, some have taken that as a strategy) you should have countered with the option to change the resources square type when the cities were allowed to move, not now.       Honestly, the only option for some is to raze their own older cities.   Implementation of this change handicaps veteran players of this game and I'm willing to be that I'm not the only one upset about this change.    I would suggest that adjustment or modification be allowed for those in this situation.   

Edit:  At least implement the option of allowing players (esp Veterans) to move their cities, even if it costs, at the same time you implement this new rule.  


Edited by Starry - 22 Jul 2011 at 22:15
CEO, Harmless?
Founder of Toothless?

"Truth never dies."
-HonoredMule

Back to Top
Darkwords View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Jul 2011 at 22:13
I have used the 0 food tactic too.  However, I always considered it a bit of an exploit and beleive getting rid of it will really level the game out and give younger accounts a better chance.

I actually think this will improve the game for all of us in the long run.  I am also pleased we have been given warning about this, but hope it does not kick in on the 1st of Aug, as I have a similar sov prob to someone above.... Cry
Back to Top
Starry View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2010
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 614
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Jul 2011 at 22:19
Younger accounts already have the advantage of an expanded world and sovereignty which was NOT implemented when many of us started.       For those that did not move their cities out of the original map area, the growth of neighbors and the influx of new players has eliminated many sov squares for old cities.   

The correction to negative food should have been addressed when sov/map expansion was released, not one year later.   
CEO, Harmless?
Founder of Toothless?

"Truth never dies."
-HonoredMule

Back to Top
Darkwords View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Jul 2011 at 22:45
hindsight is 20/20 of course
Back to Top
Brids17 View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1483
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Jul 2011 at 22:45
I'm unsure if it would be considered against the rules to say specifically what this exploit is but given that the update is coming so quickly I don't think it would be of any harm as no one will have the time to take advantage of it anyway. I apologize ahead of time if I'm not suppose to say this and completely understand if my post is removed.

I was playing with my taxes a few days ago and I realized that as my cities are already running negative food there wasn't really any incentive to keep my taxes at 25%. I have over 12k+ of each resource coming in and don't need all of that as I'm pretty much done building. When I need to build I simply move some food over to the city, queue up some stuff and then let it run out again. That said, I tested something. I moved the slider to 100% and found I would still get 5k of each resource and already having negative food having more wouldn't matter. Sov is mostly used for stopping your cities from going negative food but since negative food as no penalty, sov is worthless.

This being said, in a 22k pop city my taxes at 100% could get me over 84,000 gold per hour at no penalty. Doing this is 4 of my cities I could achieve around 112,000 units (average unit cost is 3 gold p/h) and if I did it in 7 cities (two to supply food) with maxed out population I could support around 200,000 units. All this could be done without breaking any rules or exploiting any bugs but I was unsure of whether or not I should use it to my advantage. I spoke to an alliance member privately about it and they suggested I message SC about it and see where he stood with the issue. It wasn't much of a surprise when he said this was not a desired effect.

I didn't realize the update would be made so quickly though it's good that it is being implemented quickly as to stop people from taking advantage of it. I know a lot of people are going to disagree with the update because many people (including myself) are running on negative food to achieve a high population but at the same time, it is a huge exploit.


Edited by Brids17 - 22 Jul 2011 at 22:48
Back to Top
Darkwords View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Jul 2011 at 23:01
Well said Brids, and good going on bringing the issue up  Clap
Back to Top
Starry View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2010
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 614
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Jul 2011 at 23:11
Originally posted by Brids17 Brids17 wrote:

I'm unsure if it would be considered against the rules to say specifically what this exploit is but given that the update is coming so quickly I don't think it would be of any harm as no one will have the time to take advantage of it anyway. I apologize ahead of time if I'm not suppose to say this and completely understand if my post is removed.

I was playing with my taxes a few days ago and I realized that as my cities are already running negative food there wasn't really any incentive to keep my taxes at 25%. I have over 12k+ of each resource coming in and don't need all of that as I'm pretty much done building. When I need to build I simply move some food over to the city, queue up some stuff and then let it run out again. That said, I tested something. I moved the slider to 100% and found I would still get 5k of each resource and already having negative food having more wouldn't matter. Sov is mostly used for stopping your cities from going negative food but since negative food as no penalty, sov is worthless.

This being said, in a 22k pop city my taxes at 100% could get me over 84,000 gold per hour at no penalty. Doing this is 4 of my cities I could achieve around 112,000 units (average unit cost is 3 gold p/h) and if I did it in 7 cities (two to supply food) with maxed out population I could support around 200,000 units. All this could be done without breaking any rules or exploiting any bugs but I was unsure of whether or not I should use it to my advantage. I spoke to an alliance member privately about it and they suggested I message SC about it and see where he stood with the issue. It wasn't much of a surprise when he said this was not a desired effect.

I didn't realize the update would be made so quickly though it's good that it is being implemented quickly as to stop people from taking advantage of it. I know a lot of people are going to disagree with the update because many people (including myself) are running on negative food to achieve a high population but at the same time, it is a huge exploit.


So by moving the slider to 100% what was your research at per hour?    Sovereignty costs research per hour, if you don't enough research per hour, you lose your sov squares or at least a portion of them.   For many with large troops who play the military side, sovereignty squares are vital to building, maintaining and expanding armies and related resources; some of us actually use the non-food sov squares and feel they are very important.  It's a delicate balance between increasing taxes and having enough research points per hour to support your sov squares.      I don't see why a player should have to drop sov squares due to this new rule.   It's a step back, a big one.     Implementing this new rule quickly will penalize many players, prohibit any future growth and frankly, will cost the game players.
CEO, Harmless?
Founder of Toothless?

"Truth never dies."
-HonoredMule

Back to Top
Brids17 View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1483
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Jul 2011 at 23:19
Originally posted by Starry Starry wrote:

So by moving the slider to 100% what was your research at per hour?    Sovereignty costs research per hour, if you don't enough research per hour, you lose your sov squares or at least a portion of them.   For many with large troops who play the military side, sovereignty squares are vital to building, maintaining and expanding armies and related resources; some of us actually use the non-food sov squares and feel they are very important.  It's a delicate balance between increasing taxes and having enough research points per hour to support your sov squares.      I don't see why a player should have to drop sov squares due to this new rule.   It's a step back, a big one.     Implementing this new rule quickly will penalize many players, prohibit any future growth and frankly, will cost the game players.


42 with a level 13 library. Still lots of room to boost that up. Again, the taxes are so broken that sov is still useless. I could have 6 cities build stuff, 2 cities generate food and one city bringing in over 84,000 gold per hour. In a single that I would generate over 2M gold. So problem solved, you just buy your supplies on the market with your massive surplus of gold. The taxes currently hold no weight and do you really want players running around with armies large enough to wipe out entire small alliances? Not to mention they could sustain armies larger than anyone else while at the same time maintaining godly standards of diplo defense.

I understand that people are upset with the update and like I said, I'm running negative food myself but I don't see how letting this go unfixed is taking a step forward. A city simply should not be able to run on negative food with no food at no penalty. There is no balance in that.
Back to Top
Darkwords View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Jul 2011 at 23:27
Originally posted by Starry Starry wrote:



So by moving the slider to 100% what was your research at per hour?    Sovereignty costs research per hour, if you don't enough research per hour, you lose your sov squares or at least a portion of them.   For many with large troops who play the military side, sovereignty squares are vital to building, maintaining and expanding armies and related resources; some of us actually use the non-food sov squares and feel they are very important.  It's a delicate balance between increasing taxes and having enough research points per hour to support your sov squares.      I don't see why a player should have to drop sov squares due to this new rule.   It's a step back, a big one.     Implementing this new rule quickly will penalize many players, prohibit any future growth and frankly, will cost the game players.


And by using that mechanic, you need no food sov what-so-ever, so can simply build recruitment sov, and if you have completed the statue mystery you can claim alot of it, more than doubling troop prod.

Similtaneously you can have 90k gold with about 14k population (and I'm sure its alot more with 20k pop) enabling you to maintain a massive army and re-recruit loses extremely quickly.  This is a vast advantage which completely unbalances the game.

However, it does make the 10th city unimaginable, and also makes the 9th city pretty much out of reach for those of us who have not acheived it.  So those that have been using this mechanic for long enough to get that 9th city are already at a big advantage to others.  Even if it means them having to delete a number of adv resource production structures and increase their sov claims solely for food, so that they can maintain a descent size army.

This is what I will have to do myself even with just 8 cities.

I hope some extra food prod will be possible soon, and not soon(TM).

Yet I still support this decision.


Back to Top
Brids17 View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1483
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Jul 2011 at 23:30
Getting a 9th city is still easily obtainable with lower taxes and through the use of having one city with high food production (one of my cities brings in 10,000 food per hour) or buying food on the market. Getting 10 cities might be difficult without constantly buying food on the market but getting 10 cities was never practical anyway. If anything, getting a 10th city may require alliance teamwork and encourage the alliance to help it's members out.

With the total amount of food a city can hold and running at -6800 a city can run for 112 hour on that food. If you get all 8 of your cities up none of them should have to run that negative getting 9 cities. I'd say 9 is mildly more difficult.


Edited by Brids17 - 22 Jul 2011 at 23:39
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 22>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

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