Milanos wrote:
This turned out to be a rather long post, if you want the summary check the bottom of the post.
In this Champions Era there is one thing I am noticing above all, and it is how stagnant wars are. We have been sitting next to SAGE for ages now, with none of us really able to pull off any attacks. There is a simple reason for this.. The new spies. It is quite guaranteed that on any attack you do, you will be locked, perhaps spied, and if you get locked you can expect an ion showdown. Either way, the ions are not what I want to discuss.
What I want to discuss is this agent system. It has made wars so incredibly slow that if you want to play it strategically (e.g. don't lose squads), you are going to sit on OPs all day long, adding tons of spy protection because the hostile alliance will have several spies on it. You can not attack the OP your enemy is sitting on because you will get locked and spied, they can not attack your OP because they will get locked and spied. You can try spamming, but of course you aren't going to take the OP by using a spam. You can try nuking, but if you send just 1 odds are it will be ioned, send more and your enemy moves to a new OP and the process repeats itself. On top of that, continuously nuking OPs takes quite a huge toll on (already depleted) energy reserves, and is hard to keep up.
Of course it can be said that this new spy system is more strategic. But I do wonder, how IS it more strategic? The current strategy for agents is simple, you have your team bring their agents to the frontlines, and plant agents all around. If you are fighting a war with allies, then your allies do the same. Result: All OPs are infested with spies and you can not send any actual army at it without risking losing it completely.
So what DO we see? Well, let's just go through what has decided wars so far. CBop we have managed to lock on an attack once, which I believe was about 40 squads. After this they of course stopped attacking outposts all together. Mind you, this was still early game so there were less agents around. Eventually that war was decided by them sending full army at us, no spies involved there because we just hopped from one new OP to the next and it was still early game so there was less to worry about.
Then the GML war. The turning point in the war, I would say, was GML locking LOST on an OP and then sending 120 squads into their own lock, after which we managed to damage them and kill that army. Yes, this kill was done with agents but only because GML was dumb enough to fly into their OWN lock.
Then the war with SAGE. SAGE got trapped on an ETA 6 move, II got themselves trapped, EVIL were mostly killed in colonies, I killed themselves by suiciding into BEER. Again, no spies involved. Since then we have been sitting next to SAGE for what, a week? Neither of us can attack, as SAGE demonstrated by sending one attack and immediately losing several armies in a lock.
My point is that because of the agent system it is simply becoming impossible to attack. Defenders have such a huge advantage by being able to lock their own OP and then being able to spy/ion that it is just too risky to attack anything.
I don't know how others feel about it, but this is making Battledawn a lot more boring for me. Perhaps it IS more strategic, perhaps it is more balanced as smaller alliances can now defend themselves quite well too and you can't afford to go anywhere without your fully army.. But it is making Battledawn boring for me personally. And I am not just talking about the new spy system here but about BD becoming more balanced and strategic in general. Where are the days of charging into wars with your 1 tick immunity, snowballing your conquer income because taxation actually meant something, the days of nuking relics, only taking 12 ticks to raze an OP, the days of newbies spawning crystals at 20 power, the days of a lot more people playing actively on worlds..
I might be completely alone in this regard, but I am putting it out here anyway. I believe that the older version of the New Client, despite it being less strategic and less balanced led to more wars, more competitiveness, more activity from players and a more fun gameplay in general. Higher conquer income meant competing over conquers leading to tensions between alliances and snowball effects, crystals at 20 power led to more crystals being spawned again leading to more clashing between alliances, leading to more wars and a much more intense gameplay in general. You could get started with a lot of resources because you didn't need to have all resource structures at level 3, you could build up your buildings faster. Defenders did not have such advantages, you could attack OPs in relative safety because spies were not as abundant and you could not lock your own OP before your enemy landed.
Perhaps all these changes that I have listed seem like small changes that have been made, but for me they have compounded and have made Battledawn a much more boring and stagnant game. There are few tensions between alliances, crystals aren't that abundant anymore except for with garrisons. There isn't much incentive to being superactive anymore when there is no reason to go around conquering and you can't attack any hostile OPs as you will get locked and killed. I find myself adoring the old Battledawn where fighting was abundant, people were more active, you would have tensions over crystals every few ticks, and where you could charge into wars.
Either way.. As I see this has become a relatively long post, here is a short summary. I believe that while changes that have been made to Battledawn might have made it a more balanced and strategic game (24 ticks for OP razing, longer build times and needing level 3 resource buildings to attack, the new spy system, conquer income being nerfed extremely, 30 power for a crystal), it has also made Battledawn a more stagnant game in which wars are all about waiting and defending, and a more boring game with less tension between alliances and less FUN.
Anyway, that's the short summary. I know that many that share my opinion will not see this as they have already left, but that is okay. I would very much like to hear what everyone thinks of this, and whether you agree or disagree. So please, do post.
I completely agree with you here Milan.
Overall the loss of crystals and income ect has made the game more fair but less fun.
The spy system make the game too easy and the guys who talk about how its fine have been fighting alliances that arent to impressive.
Though spammers were annoying the days when you could attack without level 3 everything was awesome. The game had a lot more going for it and I don't think this is a people just decided to quit. These little things did add up over time and we're experiencing the result of this as a whole now.
Even little things are ignored now in days. Wiki is inaccurate with a lot of things. And to just keep people playing more and more things like garrisons and what not are being added to the world to make up for low populations.
12 ticks for razing outposts was awesome and made the game in my opinion much better.
Over all I do believe that we would have more wars and competition if these things were more seriously addressed.
The game has an aura to it now that it used to not have. Players are simply just messing around on worlds not trying. These players have been playing for a long time too. It's sad, the seriousness of this game has toned down dramatically. People are scared to move units now and the rewards for top 3 are good enough for most. And adding too it constant betrayals and what not leave bad tastes in players mouths all the time....the game has been filled with this clogged atmosphere for awhile where players just constantly complain about betrayals.
Over all everything what you said, I agree with. The game needs to regain some of its former glory.
And for LC there is an xstal shortage. Relics didnt use to have xstals and garrisons weren't common.
