AdinTheDark
AdinTheDark There still need to be ways to interact with the top kingdoms. They should be constantly under pressure to lose their top position or there are runnaways.
I agree whole heartedly with this statement. But a one sided spell that requires essentially a sacrificial kingdom isn't the way to go about it, as it ends up being no fun for any parties involved. We were not having fun doing this, and if you read Enders comments in chat it doesn't sound like its very fun for him either. (But that's also because elves suck in general, which a proper amount of KS balancing would help with)
I think the biggest issue with trying to take down large kingdoms is the QR strat. You get a big enough army and sit on QR and you can't really be touched, as even though the damage you are doing is halved, your army is still big enough that it doesn't matter, while the people attacking you do half the damage.
That's why I suggested we change QR to have only half the army fight when you are on it. Similar effect as the current strat is, but the big person on QR will actually sustain measurable losses (as they wont wipe the attackers army in LR phase), and the attackers won't lose everything so they can go for round 2 with a coordinated effort once pro is done.
The other thing, as I have harped on a lot, is KS balancing. Bigger kingdoms are disproportionately favored the way military techs give KS right now, so when we sort that out and make kingdoms KS more representative of military power, the playing field will be levelled. Yes it would make Shrake/Chaos/Nolio way larger than he is right now, but all that would do is show what his true military power is, instead of it being hid behind an artificially small number
On the flip side, I do not agree with not being able to take a retal under 50% of your KS. There should always be the option for the defending kingdom to do something about a hit/offensive spell, taking that away removes interaction from the game and is just no fun for at least half the parties involved. I am fine with putting in the bottom feeding power penalties for retals though, and of course someone should not get CLI for taking a retal under 70%.
I just think the option needs to be available for people. For example, if it's a one off EQ/hit and they end up less than 50%, it might be the smarter option to ignore it and rebuild. But if its consistent, every 8 hours type of thing (like it has been), then the benefits of retaliating vs leaving yourself exposed to other hits needs to be able to be chosen.
Straight up removing the ability to do anything about these hits just isn't good for the game in my opinion. Imagine if last round, when you guys were on top and I was elf, I just managed to EQ all the smurfs and then got dropped out of the 50% range on 1 retal so only one person could do anything about it... It just isn't that engaging and can be frustrating.
On a similar note, perhaps we need to change the BF penalties. Maybe instead of a linear scale from 100% down to 0, you have say 100-70 be the same scale, but then the penalties are twice as harsh going from 70-50 (or 70-0 on a retal).
I realize the structure of this post is non-existent, but I'm tired from being up all night with a screaming baby and just wanted to get the thoughts out there. I'm happy to clarify my standpoint on specific items if anything this unclear.
