 HonoredMule wrote:
I would like to see some new races with fundamental differences from other races. For example, a dragonkin race that is much more powerful than others but can't join an alliance or use normal equipment. Lone rangers would have an overpowered account but be unable to compete against players who can work together on military campaigns and economic support.Or how about a purely nomadic tent-dwelling race of Nords that has decent offensive firepower and is excellent at dodging attacks but extremely weak on defense? Such mobility would make the game world more dynamic.Or when naval stuff and pathfinding comes out, a pirate race whose cities are actually their ships? And all the obvious details apply. 
|
I love these ideas so much. To be honest I was thinking of the same things kinda, but was holding off on details of it till I had those hammered down.
I agree that each race should be defined more than just the numbers they are now. Maybe have each race be able to make something no other race can make... Perhaps a unique siege weapon or a new unique troop or an all-in-one diplomat unit...
The pirate idea is so great... How would a player be able to siege that player if they are moving all over the place?
I also agree that solo players need more power granted to them in this game. That is very much needed indeed. I also hope this game gives the underdog player that is outnumbered a better chance to defend against overwhelming odds. Something like 300 Spartans able to fight off a much bigger force due to strategy. This game needs more strategy options. I think this game should force players to pick a certain strategy when they attack. The same for the player defending. More or less a que of 5 strategies to use. This dynamic will make the game more exciting and less predictable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_strategies
http://www.molossia.org/milacademy/strategy.html
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/awc-thry.htm#grand
Those links above are great resources to come up with sound strategy options for offensive and defensive military operations.
Just taking concepts from other sources that these strategies once selected can very well make the outcome of a game better. Intelligent minds like myself needs more stimulation than the current boring strategy in the game. Which is having more troops than your enemy, very boring. For every offensive strategy selected, their will be a defensive strategy to counter it. I mean that is one of the things I liked so much about Age of Empires, I was able to pick a strategy to attack or defend. I miss this so much, that is why I feel this game needs it.
I do understand that the devs do not like the rock, paper, scissors model... However I want the strategy to be more dynamic than that. There will be luck involved sure, but more or less the outcome would based on who is the smarter opponent. I will be coming up with a very sound and detailed way of doing this in this game very soon. As a player that has played this game for a year, I know what needs improvements and what does not.
For those that do not think the strategy in this game needs improvement than look at the current battles in game currently... Everyone is partaking in ZERG warfare (outnumbering your opponent to a point that there will be no losses building wise from their end). To win in this game you only need to have more troops than the other opponent. So the only strategy in this game is too have more troops than your opponent. Basically that battle is already decided before the battle starts because each party knows what the outcome will be. This is why this game needs a face lift on strategy.
Edited by Lionz Heartz - 10 Mar 2011 at 14:50
Tweet
More races in this game!!!!
Topic Options
