This topic is closed

The most epic updates of the year!

89 Replies
Juho
29 December, 2015, 9:35 AM UTC
Roman units if i have to pick one. Mostly bad updates and positions were a huge mistake. Also grain consumption was a mistake. The game was standing on two feet: positions and raiding, both updates harmed those two elements badly. The game needs new unit updates: carthagininan units on all unit types: defense and offense lights, heavies, phalanx and horses to fill the missing spots.
UTC +0:00
Gorgo
29 December, 2015, 10:32 AM UTC

GOOD:

Coalition missions and new units 

BAD:

firstly definitely Persian Positions change. Then grain negative units dont die removal (they live out of air :/ ). And we arrive at other only CC players features items sketches and other BS, only for $$$


Terminators
UTC +0:00
Uncle Junior
29 December, 2015, 10:36 AM UTC
Pantheon filter would top all those mentioned and I know I'm being annoying with it, but so is your lack of concern about it
†terminators†
UTC +0:00
paladin
29 December, 2015, 12:12 PM UTC

Pantheon filter - NEEDED

Positions - BRING BACK THE OLD SYSTEM

UJ - FOR PRESIDENT

†terminators†
UTC +0:00
Mystique25
29 December, 2015, 2:28 PM UTC

the most epic updates of the year are:


1- Coalition missions


2- Reduced grain consumption for champions units


3- Units will not longer be dismissed when you lack the grain to maintain them


4- Changes to Persian position mechanics


and the most worst updates are:


1- New levels of buildings (you can use sketches to upgrade them even further and gain especial bonuses)


2- global tournaments

I hope the gods read this and our views are taken into account


UTC +0:00
Michele
29 December, 2015, 2:30 PM UTC

NEW ROMANS UNITS


apart from that, i only saw bad updates, pps killed that was the best "free" source to gain better troops and coiner background all around.

p.s. the list is missing the king of updates, what has changed a war game in a slaughterhouse: battle algorithm.

Michele
UTC +2:00
Razor Blades
29 December, 2015, 5:19 PM UTC
Coalition Missions then Upgrade Sketches...Now if they would just add a resource cost reduction tree to the academy, for Phalanx & Cavalry units.
UTC +0:00
PrimeGuardian
29 December, 2015, 5:53 PM UTC

Just Alt F4 the PP new system, the sure reward is mess up, even myself cant even predict when the reward will come, try many method still, the PP change more often


Weaken all position when getting big reward you notice losing 20%

weaken all position end up having 30% of total army in hand

this 2 often happen because with the sure reward, it always toke away a part of what you gonna get on the next reward
Nothing in Common
UTC +0:00
mark
30 December, 2015, 10:09 AM UTC
relocation pools rule an excellent idea
mark
UTC +0:00
PrimeGuardian
30 December, 2015, 10:33 AM UTC
Now they can gather showing multi account stay along side, Where the Thor hammer, let ban them with it.
Nothing in Common
UTC +0:00
Joe
30 December, 2015, 3:29 PM UTC

probably not deserting troops its peace of mind while being in negative, but never had gigantic army to be too big of an issue.


back to change to PP, i don't see any problem with it.

I track my resources in spreadsheet, when i reach my previous payout value, then and only then i weak and not kill extra PP or two to push resources 10-20% over last payout, then hit desired PP level to receive payout, payment nearly guaranteed, and no surprise, you get what u paid in advance.


also what you lose aka interest was around 2% last few payouts, so i'm pretty happy with that.
UTC +0:00
bgitel
30 December, 2015, 4:15 PM UTC
coalition missions
UTC +0:00
Iron Will
30 December, 2015, 10:58 PM UTC

I really like the crazy guy who does the "12 Days of Christmas"  :)

All the other stuff is ok too.
UTC +0:00
mun.adrian
31 December, 2015, 8:58 AM UTC

So what should i pick?


UTC +2:00
el_bardera
31 December, 2015, 8:05 PM UTC

Best - Coalition missions

Worst, worst, infinitely worst - Persian Positions
UTC +0:00
Milles
31 December, 2015, 8:47 PM UTC

I don't understand, why most of you hate the persion position change, if a remember corectly, in the old system you get units only from the highest positions and nothing would make you do the lower ones, not even for coalition quests or warfares, when you would get absolutely nothing for sacrificing alot, it the new system, you get at least something (with a small chance for a multiplied reward, which is fair), i don't understand this logic. After this change, the rewards from positions are generaly better.


But to the point, i probably like the most changes in the PVP and positions warfares with ading XP and developments ones.
UTC +0:00
PANOS77
1 January, 2016, 2:35 AM UTC
ofcorse iii) coalition missions 
UTC +0:00
ThatBloke
1 January, 2016, 10:55 AM UTC

Milles said:


I don't understand, why most of you hate the persion position change, if a remember corectly, in the old system you get units only from the highest positions and nothing would make you do the lower ones, not even for coalition quests or warfares, when you would get absolutely nothing for sacrificing alot, it the new system, you get at least something (with a small chance for a multiplied reward, which is fair), i don't understand this logic. After this change, the rewards from positions are generaly better.

The reason is when the bank to pay back is huge, you need to clear lots of positions before getting a full payout.

At the same time, partial payouts you can collect on the way are less and less interesting as you hit higher level positions (I mean they're smaller and smaller compared to the needed investment to clear that level).

However, the full payout is much bigger, so it's OK in the end, but reaching it can take ages and you may fall out of troops before.

So the change is a problem for players who were hitting top positions when it was introduced.

As long as you keep hitting medium levels, you should be fine.

So when you'll reach levels 70 and so, you'll have to think twice before deciding to go on, as new positions levels are random, but are obviously spread from 1 to your maximum level... And the higher you get, the rarer easier positions drop.



By the way, nothing prevented people from hitting the lowest positions in their list if needed. You could pay back the bank with whatever position level without a problem (lower positions obviously paid back less, that's all).

It has always been better to finish the cycle hitting a position level high enough to give you a payout that was big enough to compensate the losses you had accumulated to get there, that's all. So you're right about the necessity to hit high levels, but it was only necessary to conclude and get the payout (that's why you always had, and still have to keep track of your investment to know when to hit the finishing position).

The only real difference with the new system is now you always get something from every position you finish, which is hepful to beginners (people were complaining not to get payouts all the time, so the change actually comes from players' pleads).

The drawback is they all add up to your next bank. The total payout is then bigger than before, but it makes the next bank bigger as well.

It just makes completing the next cycle longer to reach the next full payout... But the principle itself hasn't changed at all.


I pity the fool
UTC +11:00
alphnorgaming
4 January, 2016, 8:38 PM UTC
i think totally the same man
UTC +1:00
ashwin bokkies
6 January, 2016, 2:53 PM UTC
do not see the use of denarii as i do not know of a way to use it
UTC +0:00
1660768 users registered; 33436 topics; 252432 posts; our newest member:rocket.reid622