I think we need to get our perspective straight on this one. How much of the 'complexity' encountered can be attributed to the fact that older players (i.e. to jamzi and her crew :p) are so used to the existing game mechanics that any new changes are immediately disliked as they, *gasp* need to think again? In this sense the changes actually help new players by leveling the playing field.

I know I despised those changes at first (sorry Iluros). I also know it does fix things that are not great in aatw atm - I believe Iluros covered this already.

The fact remains the majority will dislike the changes (as with most changes). It's still good we are putting this up well in advance so we could get opinions and suggestions to patch things up

question i have is if i die with 0 fame, i will start my next life with 0 fame?

work the same with minus fame as well?

If you have 0 at the time of your death, you will start with 0. Minus, has not yet been discussed. But I'm inclined to say the same with it as well, yeah.

i suggest this race, only available to a certain alliance with the number 27

name: tweeties

basic: 0/10 - 5 cr
off spec: 1/0 - 1 cr
def spec: 0/101 - 1010 cr
elite: ?/? - 1400 cr
thief: 4/0 - 50 cr

*the numbers for the elite depend on your amount of toughness, and % of walls. dev, calc something for this please, thanks

ran out of ideas. of course, the only serious part is the elite thingy... would be pretty cool to implement in some race. if we want complicated, i'll give you complicated

First of all, I suggest that if anybody feels that rate of change of the game is to be discussed, move that to another thread.

As to these changes, I think I may like them. Not granted the gift of foresight I do think mass-BCs/fameraping won't be as devastating as they are now. The trade-off between fame/industry/toughness(eww) seems to me as a nice feature, resulting in little overall change from the way the game is now. As to the spontaneous generation of 'stuff' Joe mentioned... I'm going to assume you thought that out :p

My comment is mainly on the fact that the change is small, but the created complexity is large. The game will need ways to gather intel on both fame for offense estimates, toughness for defense estimates and industry for kill calculations. I'm assuming right now they will simply be added to the alliance page. Another two columns of data...

I renew my suggestion that the guide should be brief in its description of the three, only emphasising the off, def and pop bonuses. Playing style should dictate the values of fame/toughness(eww)/industry, not the other way around. Make sure this point is very clear in large bold underlined text and all should be well.

Three simple rules I could work with as a new player:
- Fame gives 1% offense
- Toughness(eww) gives 1% defense
- Industry gives 1% population
The rest... may truly be better off tucked away somewhere in the back of the guide. Experienced players can then drool all over the specifics and devise strategies based on playing styles...


Also, toughness, eww!

There is a part of the guide about the three currently which is relatively succinct. :>

I agree. (with Halcyon's post that was)

Although I also partially agree with Acwder, I do think this proposed change does make sense by making hammering for the sake of hammering less worthwhile. In KP we generally are getting a great deal of attention from random attackers, especially ones above 15k that we can't touch at all. It would be nice if we would at least gain 'something' in return for that so that the lame attackers will at least have to think if their actions are worthwhile on the long run.

Also Atan's post makes a lot of sense. Generally these numbers aren't supposed to change lots and aren't meant to make you change the way you play the game. Much rather they are meant to make your tribe resemble the way you play a bit, making your weaknesses weaker and your strong points stronger.
You can also change nothing at all ofcourse, as DW suggests and I think that would be quite ok too since the game works quite fine except for some unbalances. But the point I try to make is that this lot of text probably looks a lot more difficult than it is working practically. The game is working already roughly in a way that this system resembles.. The system is only giving numbers and bonuses on it so you can easier 'read' them and find out quickly which tribes are 'tough' to kill, which tribes are 'dangerous' and might kill you and which tribes are just focusing on (lame) growth and 'industry'/income.

Also there aren't any numbers in it yet so how it works precisely is completely unknown yet.. It's just the idea that is tossed into public here.

Example: Hammering someone to -20k fame will make him have a penalty on max tp/mp. That sucks.. On the other hand: if he wanted to go t/m later on he should have gotten serious protection against fameraping. While the huge toughness he has gained can be very good and make him very hard to kill, giving him the option to run relatively low defence and have a high income and fast growth. This decreases his toughness somewhat but growth is increasing efficiency generally also.
Getting fameraped alot can actually become a good tactic for tribes that focus on growth.

so, for a tl;dr,

Iluros, could you please edit your original post and have it reflect (in bold) that this should reflect ones playing style, and not change it? :p

Yeah, sure. :P

I thought it was intuitively obvious. The sorts of things that happen to your tribe are always helpful to the relevant goals/needs to those events. :(

That's the problem. I wondered why it's being implemented this age cause i'm not sure those mechanics will work quite correctly. Though trial and error may be best -.-

Anyway, I was against the changes at first, Dev critic certainly helped form more balanced bonuses, and the underlying motivation is what convinced me; the idea is good for reasons already named by Iluros. Cause at first I was like “what's the USE of doing this massive job?”. And quite simply the answer is “a more balanced and dynamic game, a stabilizing factor”.

Whether the changes are good or not for a more dynamic, fun and complex game is not really the question. The question is really are if these type of changes will actually IMPROVE the game, and maintain it's players. I really don't see how it could be.

In short I don't think the changes are BAD, I just don't think they will help Alliances at War at all. Just make HaRRy do unnecessary work :P

I like the idea that nothing I do will be a waste of time, the way it sometimes is now.

If I do something that's related to growth, I get a bonus to growth. If I do something that's related to aggression, I get a bonus to aggression. If I get attacked, I become more defended.

When you think of it like that, it's not so complex. Actually pretty easy to understand. It makes a lot of sense and seems elegant, the way it's kind of tied into the three branches of science.

Lol!

http://www.orkfia-portal.com/20091220/petition/

Hmmmm...I can't really imagine how these changes will impact gameplay until I see it in action...but I don't think it will serve to level the playing field.

Someone mentioned that it will level the playing field by putting vets on an even ground with noobs...But Aalis that have been around for a while after the changes come in will master the use of these three branches and create great race/bonus combos that make killing and surviving much easier. When noobs come in it will be one more thing they won't understand how to control and it may turn them off from the game. I know when I joined ork, it was a lot to try to figure out, and I quit after maybe a month. It was only recently that I came back and actually learned how to play the game. I'm just worried these new changes will make new players feel just a bit more confused than they would have before...

But as far as actual use in the game, they seem like interesting concepts that I look forward to trying out

Awesome! Let's further eliminate the playerbase further! Martel the grand genius at work!

Mdew does that mean u agree with the suggested changes or not? Coz from what I saw Martel didn't come up with them (and even signed the petition)

Well who appoints Dev?

Well not letting the dev atleast to some extension work alone will make them leave at some point just like how I made Wheelie leave when he was head of dev in Classic and I was watching over every step dev took at that point.

Letting them work alone is one thing, let them approve changes and implement them is another.

Should just be Aldorin doing the game balancing as in our glorious history :)

Simplifying matters:

[16:54] <+Bolle> its quite simple
[16:54] <+Bolle> buildings favor attackers
[16:54] <+Bolle> off bonuses favor attackers
[16:54] <+Bolle> managed acres allows them to grow through grabbing other attackers
[16:54] <+Bolle> get to 8k
[16:54] <+Bolle> get income boost
[16:54] <+Bolle> and pwn all explorers

Fix: remove CB and fame off bonuses, they're not needed. Probably lower the managed bonus to 35%?

How's that one to rant on? isn't it a lot better than Iluros epic changes? Those are an improvement in an unbalanced environment, at least mine up there are a fix in an unbalanced environment =.= oh yeah may be a bit overdone, agreed... i thought up the last line last, can prolly keep fame bonus as put in Iluros' changes if you keep the last line.

I prefer Bolle over Iluros :D

@“Canto” use this thread to comment on the changes, not people.

Obviously I meant Bolle's idea over Iluros's. :)

The idea in my mind is kind of about a separate issue, though. Related, but different. ;)