Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
   New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 05DEC11 - Advance Notice: Negative Resources
   FAQ FAQ   Forum Search    Register Register   Login Login

Topic Closed05DEC11 - Advance Notice: Negative Resources
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 9>
Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 4 Votes, Average 4.75   Topic Search Topic Search   Topic Options Topic Options
JimJams View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 20 Sep 2011
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 496 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2011 at 21:06
Thank you! This way should not be any problem.

And by the way, is not a random newbie popping near me the problem, I could even adopt him/her, but looking the ring and thinking my nearby could became that way..... wow, do you feel me ? ;-)
Back to Top
Faldrin View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 03 Sep 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 239 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2011 at 21:09
Originally posted by GM Stormcrow GM Stormcrow wrote:

I would also add that the only way of guaranteeing that no one can settle near you (as a newbie seed, or as a relocation/exodus/new city) is by claiming Level 1 (or greater) sovereignty on the squares you wish to prevent a player from settling at.

The Chancery of Estates building helps this considerably, and I'm slightly surprised more people haven't explored the limits of this option!

SC


Because the upkeep cost of the building is WAY to high considering the discount you get on the sovereignty cost.  Up the discount to at least the double and lower the upkeep cost of the Estate.

Edit: We have debated this before in this thread:
http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/07oct11-release-patchnotes_topic2569_post30355.html?KW=#30355


Edited by Faldrin - 05 Dec 2011 at 21:16
Back to Top
Tordenkaffen View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 821 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2011 at 21:43
Originally posted by Faldrin Faldrin wrote:

Originally posted by GM Stormcrow GM Stormcrow wrote:

I would also add that the only way of guaranteeing that no one can settle near you (as a newbie seed, or as a relocation/exodus/new city) is by claiming Level 1 (or greater) sovereignty on the squares you wish to prevent a player from settling at.

The Chancery of Estates building helps this considerably, and I'm slightly surprised more people haven't explored the limits of this option!

SC


Because the upkeep cost of the building is WAY to high considering the discount you get on the sovereignty cost.  Up the discount to at least the double and lower the upkeep cost of the Estate.

Edit: We have debated this before in this thread:
http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/07oct11-release-patchnotes_topic2569_post30355.html?KW=#30355


Not completely agreeing with Faldrin on this, tho I must agree that the resource I run out of mainly is research points, which are finite (in the sense that you cant improve upon them beyond the lvl 20 library and the Allembine research discovery), and the sovereignty tiles really deplete the rp production rapidly - far quicker than making it able to properly take Chancery of estates into a practical balanced use. That is my experience anyway, other may differ.
Back to Top
Sloter View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior


Joined: 14 Aug 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 304 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2011 at 22:05
It could be better i agree but when combined with two geomancers retreat it offers more room to manipulate res income.For exmpl geomancers can boost food income and sovs can boost res for geomancers retreat or other buildings with basic res upkeep.There are many options.I am glad they did not make it too easy to use or it would not be interesting :) It should definatly not be easy to keep high pop cities (over 25-26k pop).It is good that some aspects of game depend on creativity and imagination of players rather then cash and prestige.
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2011 at 23:31
One question for clarification:  Does the negative resource rule affect any town of a player with 100 or more total population?  Such as a player with a 1500 population town and a 500 population town who is now starting a third town?  Even though the third town has less than 100 population, will it still be affected?  Or does it not affect any town with under 100 population, regardless of the total population of the player?

In asking this question, I'm not expressing any opinion about how this should work, just asking how it does work.

Thanks!


Edited by Rill - 06 Dec 2011 at 00:24
Back to Top
Silent/Steadfast View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jun 2011
Location: Pacific County
Status: Offline
Points: 553 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2011 at 01:20
YEAH! At the newbie policy,  NOOOO! At the negative resources. 


"Semantics are no protection from a 50 Megaton Thermonuclear Stormcrow."-Yggdrassil (June 21, 2011 6:48 PM)
"SCROLL ya donut!" Urgorr The Old (September 1, 2011 4:08 PM)
Back to Top
Erik Dirk View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 158 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2011 at 02:20
what happens if your last building was a farm, flourmill or the equivelent of negative res!!!

 Are there going to be any changes to the population required for a new town? My biggest problem with this change has always been that those with 10 towns who used the "exploit" to get there have an unfair advantage

I would really like to see all basic production, (and those associated with basic production) removed from this new rule. and secondly make basic resource consumption count towards population required for a new city

Back to Top
sofsirwj View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 13 Sep 2011
Location: China
Status: Offline
Points: 5 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2011 at 02:22
Wondering, if I spend much long time to destroy an inactive nearby player ago.

[
 send thieves and cast blights(from the new rule of Negative Resources applied),
 set leveling barrack the top priority and do military research first, building siege army things
 and so on.
]

then i find he's gone by this miracle... Cry
Back to Top
Erik Dirk View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 158 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2011 at 03:41
Oh also if I have say negative wood then would any sov building de-level first or could a T2 building be de-levelled if it was built more recently
Back to Top
Daufer View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior


Joined: 14 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 332 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2011 at 04:44
Originally posted by Erik Dirk Erik Dirk wrote:

what happens if your last building was a farm, flourmill or the equivelent of negative res!!!
I would really like to see all basic production, (and those associated with basic production) removed from this new rule
Read carefully.  
Originally posted by GM Stormcrow GM Stormcrow wrote:

What will happen to a town in this situation
  • The buildings that are consuming the goods that you have run out of will fall into disrepair.  
Only buildings which actually consume resources would be deleveled, which means none of the resource production buildings would be affected.  None of them consume resources.  Only the new Tier 2 buildings and sov buildings which produce advanced resources or units would be affected by the rule.
Please correct me if I'm wrong SC
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 9>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.