Play Free War Battle Games Online, Multiplayer Games, Strategy Games, Top MMORPG

Ilona · **Posted:** Fri Sep 09, 2011 2:12 am

i just did a poll about changing the cooldown times after the update.

viewtopic.php?f=75&t=13472

Please vote

mfreak · **Posted:** Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:27 am

trevor1601 wrote:

A game without fair and balanced play is not going to last long. everyone knows that. out of 1500 people on a server how many are boosting $2k?

If you cant wait and follow the rules to boost that much after cool downs that is your problem. and you should be punished for it. spreading 1k out between 1000 ticks is a lot more balanced than 1 player being able to spend it in 300 ticks. and it kills the competition at least from other gamers who dont spend 2k a round.

But like i said if you guys want to get a huge advantage(boosting with cool downs already gives you advantage) then make a seperate server where rules are not followed and we will see how profitable it is for BD when there are 200 people fighting each other instead of 2000-3000

-Trevor

It doesnt kill the competition. The round is not decided by 1 person boosting. When people boost and use other peoples boost, other members automatically are unable to boost. So it all evens out there. And your claims that 2000-3000 people are fighting each other is pretty silly. Not even 200 people fight each other every era. The top 3 alliances have some notable players that's it. In any era, any server. Those 40-50 guys boost, fight each other. So nothing gets unbalanced if someone uses another persons boost. Its simply being blown out of proportion by people that cant boost.

simmen · **Posted:** Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:36 am

What would be the most efficient for a alliance?
1 guy having 3000 units, or 10 people in the alliance having 300 units each?
There is no doubt what would unbalance the game the most.

gino948 · **Joined:** Mon Jan 24, 2011 6:04 pm **Posts:** 295

simmen wrote:

What would be the most efficient for a alliance?
1 guy having 3000 units, or 10 people in the alliance having 300 units each?
There is no doubt what would unbalance the game the most.

Hmm, that's equal. how bout this?
1 active guy having 3k units or 10 people in alliance having 300 units each and half are inactive. now that's the question

Ilona · **Posted:** Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:42 am

thats same equal

1 guy alone can't win a server
a team with 5 inactives out of 10 can't win a server

simmen · **Posted:** Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:58 am

1 guy/girl with 3000 units vs 10 people with 300 units each. Who would have the advantage?
Its not equal, if all attack him at the same time its a tie, if just 1 of the 10 doesn't attack the guy/girl, the guy/girl is at advantage.

mfreak · **Posted:** Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:02 am

Quote:

What would be the most efficient for a alliance?
1 guy having 3000 units, or 10 people in the alliance having 300 units each?
There is no doubt what would unbalance the game the most.

Its for this exact reason this so called token farming WONT unbalance the game. You have to think under what circumstances it happens. It happens when you wanna rebuild. It happens when you start late. It happens when you need to defend an attack but dont have enough E etc., It hardly happens when everyone has 300 troops and 1 guy has 3000. In that case the guy with 3k troops will send tokens to others to build up since their overhead will be lower. That is how good teams work.

aviturg · **Posted:** Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:23 am

simmen wrote:

What would be the most efficient for a alliance?
1 guy having 3000 units, or 10 people in the alliance having 300 units each?
There is no doubt what would unbalance the game the most.

the question is... what would be more efficient, 1 guy having 3000 units, or 10 people having 600 units each (lower overhead will get you more units).

Dylan102 · **Posted:** Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:54 am

aviturg wrote:

simmen wrote:

What would be the most efficient for a alliance?
1 guy having 3000 units, or 10 people in the alliance having 300 units each?
There is no doubt what would unbalance the game the most.

the question is... what would be more efficient, 1 guy having 3000 units, or 10 people having 600 units each (lower overhead will get you more units).

Sadly in most alliances lately it is very hard to get everyone active and on at the same time, as most of the active players that I played with personally have retired.

Gaurav · **Posted:** Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:55 am

aviturg wrote:

simmen wrote:

What would be the most efficient for a alliance?
1 guy having 3000 units, or 10 people in the alliance having 300 units each?
There is no doubt what would unbalance the game the most.

the question is... what would be more efficient, 1 guy having 3000 units, or 10 people having 600 units each (lower overhead will get you more units).

In this situation, any 5/14 can take on the 1 guy. Meaning this 1 guy can never sleep while the alliance of 14 can rotate in and out chasing him. Again this would never happen because it is not efficient team play to boost just 1 player.

ToS clarifications and update planned for this weekend!