Fix leadering

[Neobaron]

At the moment its capless, lossless, and the tools available make it the only acceptable strategy if one wants to truly get ahead.

Indy'ing will leave you almost completely defenseless to anyone with a half decent ratio, and attacking a potential enemy only makes them stronger in a sense. Indy also caps in the 250 million to 300 million range with no hope for any further advancement given the ability of players to drop land, and the inevitable food shortages to any player massing troops.

I dont think this is any kind of ground breaking claim, so I dont really see necessity in making an explanation, but this does need to be fixed for the sake of balance.

Perhaps beefing capture to make it a set percentage of enemy leaders abducted could be in the very least a suitable deterrent. If this is already how it works, then it needs to be stronger because right now, indys with their limited resources and heavy reliance on land have absolutely zero tools to truly compete with leaders, and much less defeat them.

[The Obliterator]

Its called teamwork.
I know how you feel though i have indied alot and i can see your point.
Well its been like this for ages so i guess it prolly wont change

[CobyCopper]

Why not increase the mercenary's stocks of food? That'll balance out the running-out-of-food dilemma at least. And I beg to differ on your NW ranges; $400m is none too difficult so long as you time your runs well. That's somewhat a point of skill, however. But realize this; on 100,000 land, a leader will take longer to reach the same networth as an indier. Multiple times as many turns. Just as resources are typically consumed slower than they're produced (useful for net gain), it'll still take a good bit longer to either Goldmine or Feast your way to the same $400m or so NW achievable on that much land.

[The Obliterator]

Btw its been like this for ages just cause your getting smashed by some leaderer on turbo doesn't mean you have to complain on the forums about it.
Try:
1 Putting sheilds up.
2 Geting a leaderer to hold for you.

[Marell]

Why not increase the mercenary's stocks of food?

Agreed. What is the factor affecting how much food you can buy from mercs anyway...just your net?

And I beg to differ on your NW ranges; $400m is none too difficult so long as you time your runs well.

All depends on how much land is available. The only way solo indies can keep increasing their net is if land keeps increasing too.
$400 mil net will never be enough to win a round, which is hardly anyone solo indies aymore.



A good solution imo is to fix sack attacks. They used to do some real damage back in the day...you could take out a leaderers food and cash probably just as effectively as 1% poisons...plus you get to keep the stuff, which would help with the food shortage issue.

[Neobaron]

Btw its been like this for ages just cause your getting smashed by some leaderer on turbo doesn't mean you have to complain on the forums about it.
Try:
1 Putting sheilds up.
2 Geting a leaderer to hold for you.

Please refrain from posting. You lack the objectivity to contribute to this discussion.

I am "complaining on the forum" after having consulted several of the talent players from RWL since I came back, and the general concensus is that capture is broken, and that alone being fixed could be enough to balance the game, or the very least, give a vantage point into how much more needs to be done for true balance, or at least some semblance of balance.

---

I agree that talent does have a lot to do with it Coby, but then indy isnt exactly a hard strat to learn. Granted there are finer points that will be picked up on by more adept and seasoned players, but in general, one can learn indy over the course of a run. And my estimate of 250-300mil is assuming the conditions on reg right now, and it can probably be corroborated by others.

Marells idea is along the same lines as my suggestion and the opinions of those that I have spoken to. I guess the point is that missions on army attacks are weak or non-funcitonal, and their benefits and potential benefits are at the moment lost to anyone indy'ing, and this has thrown the game out of balance in terms of the viability of the different strats.

[Shadow]

Leader and indy have diferent strenghts - indy can make a lot of net very quickly, but can't hold onto it. Leaders make net slowly, but it builds up over time. Indy's do have a cap though, and leaders do not,, given constant land supply. Capture and sack do need to be fixed, and are in the works, but the reqrite of the attack system caused all kinds of things to stop working that are going to need fixing, so bear it out for a while while we figure out exactly why they broke.

[Neobaron]

Understood.

And please dont get me wrong here. When I left, wildcat was a legitimate choice for massing troops, and leadering was the strategy of the elite, but it was more of an unstoppable force versus immovable object type of scenario, which balanced the game quite well.

Im not asking for more net for indy so much as I am asking for tools for indys to use against leaders. I believe the net totals will balance themselves once the missions are fixed.

[Shadow]

Yes, I agree completely - capture and sack need to be fixed to give indiers back an edge over massers. It's just that the rewrite of the attack system was done in such a way that capture and sack only kick in about a quarter of the time, so the problem involves more than just upping their power.

[Neobaron]

Wait... was it rewritten to intentionally only work 1/4 of the time?

Whats the point of that?

[The Obliterator]

Nah it got a bit weird when they changed the attacking system
i think its because the old system had four boxes that you could change to sack or capture and when they changed the systems it got stuck with only one of the four working or something like that

[Juska]

Fixes:

Cap Leader Attack @ 2/3 of it's current land gain.

Increase the Base Cost of Mercenaries by 50%.

Fix the backwards race bonus code for Mercenaries, as things currently are a Marten can buy rats @ $280 and a Rat can sell them for upwards of $320. And apparently it's cheating if you do this even though it is because of a poorly written code that won't get fixed.

All promisance games (with the exception of v4.2+ QM Prom.) have a backwards bonus for the Market Race bonus. What I mean is that a Negative bonus gives that race higher Merc. buy prices, and higher Merc. Sell Prices. Whereas it should give higher Merc. Buy and Lower Merc. Sell. Because a lower selling price is actually a negative. A bonus to Market Race bonus should give Lower Merc. Buy prices and Higher Merc. Sell prices.

If you fix that and boost base Cost Only of Merc. prices then indies will be selling troops on the Mercs for horrible low prices (if they continue to have a negtive in the Market Race Bonus) and will be forced to generate income from the public market. If Base cost is increase 50% then Leaders will be forced to use the public market in order to get troops, enforcing trade and making the public market what is it actually intended to be.


Aiding your troops to a leader is not an answer to this question because it completely ignores the cries of the solo (not untagged).

[Holby]

Fixes:

Cap Leader Attack @ 2/3 of it's current land gain.

Increase the Base Cost of Mercenaries by 50%.

Fix the backwards race bonus code for Mercenaries, as things currently are a Marten can buy rats @ $280 and a Rat can sell them for upwards of $320. And apparently it's cheating if you do this even though it is because of a poorly written code that won't get fixed.

All promisance games (with the exception of v4.2+ QM Prom.) have a backwards bonus for the Market Race bonus. What I mean is that a Negative bonus gives that race higher Merc. buy prices, and higher Merc. Sell Prices. Whereas it should give higher Merc. Buy and Lower Merc. Sell. Because a lower selling price is actually a negative. A bonus to Market Race bonus should give Lower Merc. Buy prices and Higher Merc. Sell prices.

If you fix that and boost base Cost Only of Merc. prices then indies will be selling troops on the Mercs for horrible low prices (if they continue to have a negtive in the Market Race Bonus) and will be forced to generate income from the public market. If Base cost is increase 50% then Leaders will be forced to use the public market in order to get troops, enforcing trade and making the public market what is it actually intended to be.


Aiding your troops to a leader is not an answer to this question because it completely ignores the cries of the solo (not untagged).

Juska,

Spoken truly like someone who has only ever indyed, and only ever indyed with the one strat.

Every comment you have ever made about the game involves only changes that benefit you, as an indy player with your exact strat. Never the game as a whole. I don't even read most of what you say anymore, because your bias is so apparent.

[Juska]

Ignoring my bias for the moment. Did you even consider my point about Racial Bonuses and the effect it has on Merc. Sell prices? And how logically it is broken?

Barring that I agree that boosting Merc. buy Prices is a bit drastic and technically hurts Leaders. But assuming you fix racial bonuses like I say it makes Merc. selling indies nearly worthless. Forcing them to either Market sell or direct aid with a leader. Because of supply/demand troop prices would fall to level that is beneficial to both parties on the whole, as long as there is a seller and buyer both go home happy, both just get hit even harder without.

Yes, it totally destroys the norm Holby.

I've run plenty of strats, if I choose to Indy here it's because I prefer to be the minority.

Also, pray-tell what "other" indy strats there are? If your an indy you sell troops for cash via the Merc. or the Market or you get cash aided to you by someone who makes it some other way.

I classify strats by the way in which they make their money, if you make money some other way, but make your own troops you are not an indy you are a dominant (insert money method) hybrid indy at best.

Why do you smash me because of my bias whereas I echo half the posts in this topic?

[Holby]

Ignoring my bias for the moment. Did you even consider my point about Racial Bonuses and the effect it has on Merc. Sell prices? And how logically it is broken?

That was a silly post for me to quote. It's just my general annoyance that every change you come up with is about you.

I agree that the racial bonus thing is silly. And yes, that should be fixed.

What I find irritating is the "2/3 reduced land gain from leader attacks", when the way leaders die off now is already insanely damaging. I like your Market idea in upping Mercs to promote Market use, but there are issues with that, too.

You are an indy, and have never (at least here) played any other strategy. So your bias makes it hard for me to take you seriously. But I do apologise for jumping the gun when you have some valid points.

I think if Capture and Sack were fixed, indying would be much more powerful. Especially if Sack gains were higher. And that would be beneficial.