| Author |
|
Elmindra 
Forum Warrior
Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 464
|
 Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 17:15 |
|
No sov, 5 food, half mana. You could support with basics and with a one-time decent attack, but forget about replacing those troops any time soon.
|
|
|
 |
Anjire
Postmaster
Joined: 18 Sep 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 688
|
Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 17:07 |
There are healthy restrictions for living within the protected zone enough so that with the current game mechanics there really won't be a lot of "support" some one can offer.
|
|
|
|
Arakamis
Greenhorn
Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Location: Waterdeep
Status: Offline
Points: 97
|
Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 16:24 |
|
What if an alliance choose to build all their cities in the protected lands and in the event of a war support their allies from there without a possibility to become a target.. there needs to be some restrictions for those who choose to build their cities in the protected zone.
Non-Protected Zone is just what it is.. Non-Protected Zone. i'm not against pvp but there is no need to exaggarate the meaning to something else.. it is just like Elgea.. it is the people setting the rules..
|
|
geofrey
Postmaster General
Joined: 31 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1013
|
Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:38 |
I think the PVE will detract from more PVP.
I honestly think there will be less conflicts involving the destruction of cities, and more conflicts involving PVE goals... For example the Dwarf and Elf factiosn encourage their loyalists to both try and take over a square. So now all the players allied with the Dwarves and all the players allied with the Elves are both fighting to take over a square.
It creates more conflict, without involving the destruction of another players cities.
|
|
|
|
bansisdead
Postmaster
Joined: 08 Jan 2012
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 609
|
Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:35 |
 gameplayer wrote:
of course there is no need for training alliances on broken lances with the protected area.
|
I dont think the Devs should be getting involved in what an alliance does or doesn't do. It is the players choice and not the devs. Just because there is a protected zone doesn't mean new players wont benefit from being a member of a training alliance. After all a protected zone isn't able to offer resources and advice on how best to build a city, this is down to the goodness of the player base. Long live training alliances!
|
|
|
|
twilights
Postmaster
Joined: 21 May 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 915
|
Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:27 |
|
we need alot more new people playing this game
|
|
Anjire
Postmaster
Joined: 18 Sep 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 688
|
Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:24 |
|
I predict history will repeat itself.
|
|
|
|
Auraya
Postmaster
Joined: 17 Nov 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 523
|
Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:23 |
As with everything, we will start to see the community form rules of what is and isn't acceptable within this PvP zone. I highly doubt it will sink to the same levels as Travian, Evony, Tribal Wars etc. People will still defend new players who settle in the PvP zone until they are established. There will still be the same consequences for unprovoked attacks. Some alliances will claim 'What happens in Broken Lands, stay in Broken Lands' and others will carry it over to Elgea.
The PvE zone is great though. I imagine many people will grow their cities there first then exodus out to the PvP section, providing the game mechanics will allow that.
|
|
Rill
Postmaster General
Player Council - Geographer
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903
|
Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:21 |
Brids17 wrote:
DeathDealer89 wrote:
Or Broken Lands will be populated by mostly the same people that populated Elgea. So why wouldn't the same anti-war stance have been brought over to there? |
Because unlike Elgea you are choosing to place your cities in a pvp zone. |
Given the severe limitations of the "peace" zone (5 food, no sov), placing a city outside of it will not necessarily indicate a desire for PvP. It might just indicate a desire to claim sovereignty in order to become an A1 cattle merchant. Probably there will be lots of people who will say wishing to be peaceful outside the dedicated peace zone is not a valid option and to "go back to Verten." Hur, hur, hur. wargarble garble.
It's completely predictable, and I'm not particularly looking forward to it.
|
|
ES2
Postmaster
Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 550
|
Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:10 |
gameplayer wrote:
its going to be hard to play both servers unless u just want to vocally play both. i cant believe with a fresh start and all the great variables the devs have provided that the gameplay will not be the same at all. please keep the 100 member limitation per alliance and of course there is no need for training alliances on broken lances with the protected area. wow that limits the control of older accounts and alliances right away...i wonder how they going to bring over inactive accounts that are being sat?. and image there is finally going to be good areas to place castles without control of the older alliances. remember game play is going to change, people will play mainly on one server or the other and its very tough to start the game completely new when u are use to controlling everything on another server. accept that there are new ways to play, please dont bring over the same tired talk to broken lands
|
Whatever Twilights
|
|
Eternal Fire
|
|
Tweet
soon no more anti war crying
Topic Options
