| Author |
|
DeathDealer89 
Postmaster
Joined: 04 Jan 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 944 |
 Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 04:21 |
Wow never knew you thought so highly of H? as to see them as unbeatable. I'm sure the devs pay close attention to things like player retention. I highly doubt that H? will siege many players on the consone side such that they will rage quit, although they might who knows.
But I must ask which do you think is more likely to be a problem? Playing a game designed for war but no one ever goes to war. Or playing a game where people are constantly at war, yet the newer players (the ones like to quit) are simply off limits.
I dare say the devs are more worried about players getting bored with the game than players rage quitting because they are going to war in a game where well lets face it you build cities to build troops to kill things.
|
 |
The_Dude
Postmaster General
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396 |
Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 04:33 |
|
The Devs have been clear ... they will not intervene in these situations.
|
|
DeathDealer89
Postmaster
Joined: 04 Jan 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 944 |
Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 04:39 |
|
Well imagine how much you would hate a game that you worked a year to defeat your enemy then the devs decided that wasn't going to happen. You would face huge political backlash and likely a few high members who likely spend quite a bit on the game would probably rage quit.
|
|
Magnificence
Wordsmith
Joined: 21 Nov 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 122 |
Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 04:49 |
|
I don't consider H unbeatable.
|
|
DeathDealer89
Postmaster
Joined: 04 Jan 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 944 |
Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 04:59 |
 Magnificence wrote:
theres really no hope of becoming anything more than an H vassal/little brother.
I mean, why play if not to win? and if winning becomes next to impossible....
|
My bad i misunderstood your post.
|
|
Magnificence
Wordsmith
Joined: 21 Nov 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 122 |
Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 05:14 |
Yeah, you've taken me out of context there man.
But, hey, that's the spirit of the Illy forums, so its no big.
|
|
Llyorn Of Jaensch
Postmaster
Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 924 |
Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 06:26 |
Magnificence wrote:
It seems like if H continues with these sieges to a point where VIC is damaged beyond reasonable repair, that would seriously hurt current player retention. |
1,
ONE Vic town has been sieged.
VIC: Towns: 672
Perspective please.
Magnificence wrote:
I mean, why play if not to win? and if winning becomes next to impossible.... |
Awww. You mean only play if YOURE winning.
But maybe I dont wanna play like that....
|
|
"ouch...best of luck."
HonoredMule
|
|
Llyorn Of Jaensch
Postmaster
Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 924 |
Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 06:28 |
DeathDealer89 wrote:
But I must ask which do you think is more likely to be a problem? Playing a game designed for war but no one ever goes to war. Or playing a game where people are constantly at war, yet the newer players (the ones like to quit) are simply off limits.
I dare say the devs are more worried about players getting bored with the game than players rage quitting because they are going to war in a game where well lets face it you build cities to build troops to kill things.
|
+100
|
|
"ouch...best of luck."
HonoredMule
|
|
Magnificence
Wordsmith
Joined: 21 Nov 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 122 |
Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 08:03 |
I have lost a lot of respect for you Llyorn, catering to the lowest possible dominator is an easy game to play.
And using Ad Hominem arguments is the same.
Step your forum game up laddie buck, I used to look up to you.
EDIT: Grammar correction.
Edited by Magnificence - 21 Oct 2012 at 08:03
|
|
Llyorn Of Jaensch
Postmaster
Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 924 |
Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 08:31 |
Magnificence wrote:
I have lost a lot of respect for you Llyorn, catering to the lowest possible dominator is an easy game to play.
And using Ad Hominem arguments is the same.
Step your forum game up laddie buck, I used to look up to you.
EDIT: Grammar correction.
|
Erm, I though I was replying to your statements? I thought I had posted a reasonable counter to your perspective. If you wish clarification then I am happy to do so.
The word play at the close was based on your statement and although perhaps harsh was used to illustrate what I understand to be a very genuine point.
If my response needs clarification I am more than happy to do so.
Laddie buck ;)
|
|
"ouch...best of luck."
HonoredMule
|
|
Tweet
Why do you associate maturity with peace in a game
Topic Options
