My wishes :))

[william86x]

Just play Bunkers instead. It's ezimbamode (or something like that)

 

[Polo]

Just play Bunkers instead. It's ezimbamode (or something like that).

 

[Alcibiades]

Just play Bunkers instead. It's ezimbamode (or something like that).

Imba Imba Ezzmode actually You're such a tunnelvissioner Polo

 

[f0xx]

Can you imagine if alliances were made of 5, Twig would now be having a powerblock of 12 alliances.

Makes me giggle just at the thought of it.


Unapproved by Pinpower
Reason: Spam and a tiny flame.

 

[DarkSider]

I like the reduced members suggestion, a few rounds ago we had 15 members and for some reason it got changed back. Even if your alliance will suffer more casualties i think it's better to kill and get killed alot instead everybody recall from mass defence and log off because they can't play.
Not quite sure about the 50% limit, i think rewarding attacking strong oponents is better than totally block attacking under 50% while there's not that many players left.

 

[Hobbezak]

Ok so I have been thinking how to make this game better and more enjoyable for persons like me. Since I think I represent a big playerbase, beginners(noobs), I think you should hear what we think could be better all in all, maybe.

Agreed to some extend, problem is that new players don't really know enough about the game to make good suggestions, they, and quite rightly, cannot be arsed to read past suggestions, so they'll likely make suggestions that have been suggested before in the past etc etc.
So I think that the best suggestions, the real improvements, will probably come from the older, more experienced players. But please prove me wrong.

I think alliances should be smaller since 20members in quite a lot in a playerbase like this. The gap between good players and bad players is too big. If there were smaller alliances like 5-10 ppl there would be more competion for good, average, bad players. Then you also would see what players are best,most active, choose the smartest routes. And there could be counter tactics. I dont see any of that now, not much at least.

I really disagree. Larger alliances means the more skilled players will have to look for new faces to join, because 20 players is quite a lot. I personally would have no problem finding 9 active players that I know, who would want to join me. 19 was in the past a problem, you have to find 2-3 new faces. And that's exactly what you want to achieve, no?
Secondly, smaller alliances means that alliances who are less active, will get killed more often. Less possibly defenders, so either you are more active, or you just have less defensive power, and therefore will get killed more.

Also what could be done, is that you higher the attacking cap to 50% instead of 30% so there would be more of a fair war than just big boy gank. It would also slower the expansion of good players so that the really good players are in the top and not the people with most time.

That will just induce more bashing. If you can't land on your own, you come back with a mate. If you can't land with 5 players, you come back with 10. More bashing is something that I think we don't need.
Furthermore, it's a knife that cuts both ways. If someone around rank 200 has more difficulty getting land, it will be more painful to lose land. If it's easy to get your land back, it's not that bad losing it to someone who is larger than you.
The game is, and always has been, a waterfall system. Rank 1 steals from rank 70, rank 70 steals from rank 200, rank 200 from rank 500, and for the newer players, they can always steal from each other, or from bots.
All in all, I don't think increasing the attack cap would really help new players.

 

[rooney]

and also, decreasing alliance sizes will strengthen solo comparatively - something that we definatley do NOT want to see

 

[william86x]

Just play Bunkers instead. It's ezimbamode (or something like that)

 

[f0xx]

I missed you william, start the pwnage now plz

 

[Hobbezak]

To Hobbezak,

No, I really think smaller alliances would make this game more open for everybody and more wars between players/alliances. Would be easier to attack and harder to defend. Then you could play with friends too, living in the same timezone. I mean its easier to play with 5-10 people then 20, you would actually feel apart of that alliance then and be an important role. As it is now I dont think an alliance use all 20members to its limits, I think there is a several important players in each alliance that makes the alliance strong and a few people that dosnt mean anything to the alliance. They are just there to fill out the spots, and that just stupid.

Stupid, or a chance for new people to prove themselves? When, back in the old days, I was leader of a top 3 alliance, I had to recruit a player that I had never heared of. I took a major risk because his profile was what we were looking for (active, right timezone, sounded trustworth). Turned out he was most active in our ally, and stayed on rank 1 for a week or so. And I doubt Zhouj didn't feel part of the alliance.
It all depends on the player. If he's active, and decently skilled, he will always feel part of the team.

I think it would be far more interesting to have 20 top alliances than just 5 as it is now. It would mean that from rank 1 to 20 there is good and big diffrence, not like now, where you can clearly see who is the best alliances. Its not intersting enough as it is now. Cant be fun to play in the top alliances, just sitting on their land and troops, waiting for the others to get in range :S.

Smaller alliances wouldn't change that. We had alliances of 15 players, and the result was identical. One alliance wins, everyone else stays out of range because they can't take them on. Is that per se a bad thing? No one can play competitively for 76 days. I am personally convinced that it is good that a round is decided in 2-3 weeks max, so you don't need the enormous activity for more than those 2-3 weeks.

I dont think there would be more bashing than now if you would higher the attack range to 50% since it would be harder for everyone to get land. And It would cost a lot more to attack someone than now. The skill rate as it is now is that you fight someone that is 30% of your skills and thats pathetic, not even a challenge to steal land from someone 30% of your score. Good players would expand faster than average players, average players would expand faster than bad players and bad players wouldnt have so much to loose cause they would expand slowly. Good players fight good players, average players fight average players and noobs fight noobs Or good players bashes good good/average players and average players bashes average/noob players and noobs bashes noobs/bots.

Seriously, you should read the forums more often. F0xx made (for once? ) a very valuable point in another topic. He said "If I can't land with 3 players on a target, I come back with 5". The fact that you can still land on your own (in 30% range, of 40% range, doesn't really matter), is a good thing. You can be skilled all you like, but if everyone in your range is in a decently active ally, it is impossible to land. Which means that you will have to resort to waving/bashing the ally.

Also the diffrent routes would play a funnier role, since you could mix the routes very diffrently. Not like now that you can have any route in the alliance you want. Well i think it would play a bigger and funnier role what routes all the alliances would go.

If you ask me, it will be the end of certain already underused routes in ally play, because there will be no room left for strange set-ups. + It has already been shown that with a good combination of thug, pom and PA you can win, without getting (m)any other routes. But maybe I'm wrong here.

 

[william86x]

Just play Bunkers instead. It's ezimbamode (or something like that).

You are one retarded and very kiddy moderator. Like seven years or something ? Get a life instead of posting crap like that you ****in asswhole. Im not sure why im playing this game or visit this forum when there are retarded moderators like you. Really keep those show off comments for yourself and your forumfriends. FFS, damn retard why you must be such a ****, it would be ok if you didnt have that moderator logo on your name but you have it and your comment was ****in lame. Like you want to have a flame war with me. OK! HERE YOU GET IT YOU ****IN RETARDED COUNTERSTRIKE ADMIN, ****in supernerd macho -*im moderator, im pro, look at me* FFS ****IN USELESS PEOPLE ALL OVER THIS FORUM. SAME PEOPLE EVERY ****IN TIME POSTING **** LIKE THIS. GO **** YOURSELVES, GET A LIFE INSTEAD OF MOLESTING AND WANK AT THIS FORUM.

I ****IN DELETE MY ACCOUNT CAUSE I CANT STAND IDIOT MODERATORS LIKE YOU, NOT GONNA WASTE MY ****IN TIME OR YOUR TIME IF THATS WHAT YOU WANT. I HAVE BETTER THINGS TO DO LIKE GO TO GYM,MEET MY ****MATES, DANCING & ENJOYIN LIFE & MYSELF.

GOD I FEEL SO GOOD NOW THAT I DONT CARE ABOUT THIS ****IN ADDICTED GAME ANYMORE.

I WONT ****IN PROMOTE THIS GAME TO ANYONE, I JUST HATE RETARDED MODERATORS AND ADMINS AND PEOPLE. SURE I CAN BE A RETARD TOO IF I WANT, ****IN BRITISH PRICKS"!



Moderated by Weeble
Moderated until further action can be decided and post can be fully read!

 

[william86x]

Just play Bunkers instead. It's ezimbamode (or something like that).

You are one retarded and very kiddy moderator. Like seven years or something ? Get a life instead of posting crap like that you ****in asswhole. Im not sure why im playing this game or visit this forum when there are retarded moderators like you. Really keep those show off comments for yourself and your forumfriends. FFS, damn retard why you must be such a ****, it would be ok if you didnt have that moderator logo on your name but you have it and your comment was ****in lame. Like you want to have a flame war with me. OK! HERE YOU GET IT YOU ****IN RETARDED COUNTERSTRIKE ADMIN, ****in supernerd macho -*im moderator, im pro, look at me* FFS ****IN USELESS PEOPLE ALL OVER THIS FORUM. SAME PEOPLE EVERY ****IN TIME POSTING **** LIKE THIS. GO **** YOURSELVES, GET A LIFE INSTEAD OF MOLESTING AND WANK AT THIS FORUM.

I ****IN DELETE MY ACCOUNT CAUSE I CANT STAND IDIOT MODERATORS LIKE YOU, NOT GONNA WASTE MY ****IN TIME OR YOUR TIME IF THATS WHAT YOU WANT. I HAVE BETTER THINGS TO DO LIKE GO TO GYM,MEET MY ****MATES, DANCING & ENJOYIN LIFE & MYSELF.

GOD I FEEL SO GOOD NOW THAT I DONT CARE ABOUT THIS ****IN ADDICTED GAME ANYMORE.

I WONT ****IN PROMOTE THIS GAME TO ANYONE, I JUST HATE RETARDED MODERATORS AND ADMINS AND PEOPLE. SURE I CAN BE A RETARD TOO IF I WANT, ****IN BRITISH PRICKS"!


Moderated by Pinpower
Will leave Weeble to issue infraction as he originally dealt with him.

 

[f0xx]

Lol, now we know he doesn't take jokes well. OH wait, we knew that before as well :roll:


Edit by Weebs
Related to above posts, and so makes no sense in the context of the rest of the thread