Turbo unmaxxing

Started by Shadow, August 03, 2011, 09:17:49 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Shadow

Shael and I were discussing the maxxing-landlocks that are possible on turbo after Sevs brought it up. In the interest of making this not possible, we talked about raising the unmaxxing rate to three per hour, rather than 1 per hour. That way, you will be open to about the same amount of hits between runs as on reg.

Thoughts?
<=holbs-.. ..-holbs=> <=holbs-..

Kilkenne

you're fat that is my thought.

Neobaron

I don't like this. No sense in immediately making it easier the moment a challenge is spotted.

Under these circumstances, if someone is locking and sitting on that much net, they are going to be extremely vulnerable in not a lot of time. Everyone knows indy is unsustainable. Either some food massing group will pass him or a troop massing group will accumulate and pass around enough net to break.

This situation will play itself out. Before long, someone will manage to accumulate enough stuff to break or surpass.

Let it go, in my opinion. 
Neobaron, first among the lords of the south and captain of the flying skiff

Quote from: Death on February 08, 2010, 09:40:29 PM
oh lawd the drama done begun yo

Quote from: HolbyI am writing a post explaining how lame you are.

Shadow

It has been suggested several times before.

The issue is not locking with troops (nicely done). The issue is locking land simply by getting maxxed out. This is not a problem that we have currently.
<=holbs-.. ..-holbs=> <=holbs-..

Pippin

wouldnt mind it, would definately like to see it on land farm though, the amount of land it has is just wasted and it doesnt attack so 22 hours for a full attack doesnt seem right.
1. Mike Oxlong (#14)
$16,999,999,999 with 275,000 Acres
3. AL CAPONE (#23)
$887,873,381 with 14,939 Acres
3. wrecking balls (#9)
$801,398,171 with 32,301 Acres
1. Nazgul (#5)
$1,503,190,327 with 201,952 Acres

Neobaron

Ahh sorry Shadow, I read OP in the context of the current round.

You mean permanently.

---

It makes sense I guess.

Just not until next round.
Neobaron, first among the lords of the south and captain of the flying skiff

Quote from: Death on February 08, 2010, 09:40:29 PM
oh lawd the drama done begun yo

Quote from: HolbyI am writing a post explaining how lame you are.

Shadow

Oh right. Yes, I meant permanently.
<=holbs-.. ..-holbs=> <=holbs-..

Kilkenne

I think it makes sense to do, in all seriousness. My question would be, though, is this something that makes leader takedowns even easier? (The answer is yes) And is this something that we want to do? I understand that maxing by flailing away at defenses is no bueno but there's definitely a real fact that would be taking 3x the leader suicides in a day making it just about impossible to hold anything as long as there are two people with a pulse and a decent stoat strategy wailing away at you while you sleep.

Don't get me wrong, this benefits me as I play when most people are sleeping, and generally am coordinated and such when necessary so that we might do things, but this does seem sort of excessive. Maybe two is a better way to go about it at first, to see how it feels. (One every 30 minutes)

Neobaron

Kilk makes a pretty good point, actually.
Neobaron, first among the lords of the south and captain of the flying skiff

Quote from: Death on February 08, 2010, 09:40:29 PM
oh lawd the drama done begun yo

Quote from: HolbyI am writing a post explaining how lame you are.

Shadow

unclanned leader takedowns are rather difficult at the moment, to the point of not being worth it. Faster unmaxxing could change that for the better. But I am fine with doing 2 per hour at first.
<=holbs-.. ..-holbs=> <=holbs-..

Kilkenne

2 per makes unclanned takedowns a lot more viable.

Also, what if we did 2/hr, and raised the max to 30? That, I think, is more appropriate for the Turbo, because generally people that are far and away above everyone don't get touched until a takedown attempt, in my experience, and 8 more attacks could matter. Also why are you posting, but not on MSN gettin' drunk with us?

Shadow

we had a max of 31 once. It was not fun. Ended up just passing the entirety of the game's land from one person to the next.

with faster unmaxxing bu the same limit, this won't happen, but neither with max-locking
<=holbs-.. ..-holbs=> <=holbs-..

Sharptooh

Faster unmaxxing sounds like a good idea to me, although I can only echo what Kilk said with regards to the unmaxxing rate