just a quick note to let you all know that scoring in Campaigns are now based on Elimination first then Tribute.

So its more important to survive as long as possible.

Tribute (Score) is also now for that turn only. So your score is your CURRENT Tribute, not accumulative.

How will that work with Markets then & selling Tribute for extra cash?

Will your accumulated Tribute still be available to sell?

Are Market Places now completely redundant?

If this impacts current games & I lose my tribute/cash pile I will not be a happy camper!!

Also, what about voting to end? You could have a situation where there is a clear leader iro accumulated tribute ('cos they managed their camp better) but their tribute per turn is lower than another who used all their tribute surviving to this point?

Last Edited : Wednesday, 21 January 2009 - 22:52

Thanks for that Req - I appreciate losing 600,000 in gold.

Cheers for nothing!

umm why did u change the tribute?i'm fine with the scoring but not the tribute..

WHAT? no this really sucks...?

I just checked, I saved all that tribute for nothing, so there is no point in having it? you just sell it?

Something must gone bad. In campaign 27959 I play in I lost all tribute I had (more then 5200. that means nearly 100k gold ...). 2 inactive guys are the first 2 on the list. As they lost much less this turn then all the others ... Ranking change is ok, but the tribute was erased by mistake I think (you can rank by income, there is no need to erase all tribute).

So I dont think the tribute will go to zero every turn. Maybe it had to this turn to make this change. I should have selled my tribute last turn to buy 2 heavy cavalry, 2 knights, 1 ballista, 2 macemen and a catapult

wont this just cause the last turn to be the only important one? whoever gets the most trib that turn will win?

Last Edited : Thursday, 22 January 2009 - 16:43

LOL!

seriously though... if everyones trib is returned to zero each turn, then the battle will be to hold the castles/mines one has. A player wont be able to get the huge lead and sit back waiting for other players to come to him. They will be forced to keep fighting to hold on to their top position.

It is unfortunate(sp?) that inactive players scores werent affected during the reset.

my 1 turn/day game wasn't affected, maybe it will be tomorrow. piles are useless now, or, save all the piles you can until the last turn of the game and have a unit beside it. Winner will be who gets/saves the most piles. Fighting is pointless again except to gain hold territory/a much more patient gamezzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

geez at least make it 50/50 fighting/tribute!

ya, i guess fighting has become pointless as far as score goes... unless your sure you can destroy somebody... and i bet not even your SURE you can destroy anybody huh Ren?
it will make taking their castles easier again though... they wont be able to sell off all that trib to keep making troops to defend it with

I don't get it..

If tributes is taken away and ranking is based on surviving... Then why is those inactives and eliminated player ranks higher than the surviving one?

I know that cause one of my campaign has only 2 player left standing and suddenly both that player was send to the bottom of the rank... That a bummer!

as the player who has played the most games...THIS TOTALLY SUCKS!16k in tribute gone and no gold.i dont even have commerce.CHANGE IT BACK

I see you want inactives to be pushed back down the rankings, so why not only wipe their tribute if no moves are made

As I said above this change has not been through properly.

Everyone that was patiently building up their tribute pile now have nothing to show for it (for the record I had 30500) and the revenue you get from castles and goldmines is useless compared to the cost of techs and higher level troops.

In one camp I am in (which shall remain nameless) I have 9 castles and 19 goldmines plus all the revenue techs up to Empire yet my income is barely enough to put out two Master level troops or one Marks per turn - hardly the basis for exciting large-scale battle play!!

These changes are starting to make duels and camps little more than battles on bigger maps as no-one will be able to afford to do anything other than put out minimal low level troops and that's just BORING!!

As several guys have mentioned the winner is now determined by the last turn and in duels that could mean a player who is getting whipped attacks, scores big tribute points, then quits as the winner.... not really what was intended I suppose?

As Renno mentioned, the only way to guarantee a win is to have a stack waiting at every resource pile you can find until the last turn when you destroy them all and get the extra tribute.

For a supposed war STRATEGY game, the strategy part is being eliminated every time a change is made.

Please, please, please, please, please bring back the game I joined and loved where every different type of resource had a use and value and every resource pile and building was worth fighting for. Where strategic thought was required to balance resources, economy and troops and winning was based on how much you killed over the piece - not how much you found and destroyed on the last turn!

their is a bug. its the fact that inactives tribs werent reduced the way the rest of ours were. besides that it just equalized everyone. sucks for those who had large amounts saved up but at least it sucks universially.

ive been playing all day with the changes and i and my opponents have level 2 and 3 troops. its just harder to get there and the fight for resources trumps the desire to rush out and destroy enemy troops.

as far as placing units near piles and trying to hoard them till the end. it wont happen. if you try your leaving yourself open to attack by your opponent. i have continued to play as normal and just adjusted the way i use my market.

as i said before. it prevents a player from stockpiling points and forcing their opponent to come to them. now you must continue fighting every turn to protect your resources.

of course a player on a big map with few actives left could go out in search of piles and im sure their are those that will. but im also sure the majority of the players here come to fight to the end not win by technicalities. the safest bet is going to be to know your opponents and join camps that have honorable players, most likely ones whose level is near your own.

keep in mind that owning multiple castles in a camp still will get you increased trib. so unless you can find a BUNCH of piles your not going to be able to offset that. im in a camp now where one player is getting upwards of 700 points a turn just from the castles he has taken over. i doubt theres that many piles on the map to begin with.

the game goes on and we will all adapt.

Last Edited : Thursday, 22 January 2009 - 20:41

simon says give req time to solve this. i lost 31,000 plus tribute... but it is just a game. i'll live! it is quite obvious this needs to be resolved.
Here is just my thoughts!
i think no tribute at all would be fine...you could earn income from resources etc. and get a specific amount for each castle you own. therefor, giving good reason to rule more land than your opponents...points would be given per kill. if you kill a low lovel troop you recieve a lower amount of points compared to killing a high level troop which rewards you with higher points. the leader would be the person with the highest amount of total accumulative kill points. destroying your own buildings shouldn't earn you anything. but destroying the opponents should. which gives good reason to protect all your properties while trying to expand your kingdom. the person with the highest amount of total kill points at games end would be the winner. if you eliminate another player maybe a bonus of sorts could be rewarded. I just think the player who technically earned the most kill points should be rewarded as a warrior and a winner... it shoulldn't be given to the player who just bops around destroying wood piles and saving tribute. the more of the map and resources you own, the bigger army you can build. the better your chances are of ruling the kingdom!

just my twenty two and a half cents worth
SSD

twenty two and a half cents?

your way is close to the way it used to be. points based on kills minus losses. i always liked that way too. trib is ok but it needs to be tweeked. somewhere between what we now have and what we had the last few months. I agree, a player shouldnt be able to win just by running around grabbing up piles and mines and castles of inactive players. it gives an unfair advantage to a player lucky enough to be surrounded by inactives, while players next to each other who are fighting continually get penalized for trying to survive.

My suggestion is as follows, and I told Req about it last night:

1/3 of your score based on kills/deaths
1/3 based on accumulated tribute
1/3 based on final holdings

Req's objection was that tribute can either be accumulated or tallied on last turn not both. I personally don't see why that has to be the case. It requires some coding be done but I don't believe that is a major obstacle.

My reasoning is that kills/deaths should count for something like they used to do. Accumulated tribute would be used for the market and toward final score. The final reckoning would reward those who lasted longest and held the most at the end. If a player decides to spend tribute it will weaken their final score but not totally decide it.

There has to be a reason to fight, to gather resources and to hold ground. I think this is one way to do that. Unfortunately, I agree this was a poorly thought out change and I feel for those who got burned by it. Requiem is still thinking about other changes to the game. I hope he will get more input from us and warn us of impending changes.

I have lost interest in playing the game as it is now structured and haven't played in some time. While I still believe it can be restored to being a really fun game, I think too many changes have driven off too many good players. One of the reasons people play games like this is that they understand the rules and strategies after a process of learning. To have to re-learn (at a cost of rank usually) every few weeks or months is not a good way to go about keeping people on the site.

If the game gets back to some fixed set of rules, bugs are not ignored and player input is actually listened to Requiem has a chance of regaining our trust and involvement. Otherwise, with an everchanging set of rules and unfixed major bugs the game is unplayable.

It's a brutal thing to make a game like this work well. At some points in the past it has functioned well enough to draw fanatical players willing to spend time (and money) to play it. Sorry to say, at this time it is badly broken and getting worse.

Req, I'm sorry to be so blunt, you know I admire your abilities and generosity, but this inconstancy has to stop somewhere.