Ah- TW Half Price Nobles Vote Time Please!

LOVERLOVER

Guest
I think world 19 met the requirements for the voting on half priced nobles. Can we please have a vote????
 

chrisparty

Guest
what are the requirements anyways? Are they listed somewhere?

Lover with 2x the nobles scares me. I'll get nobled while I sleep :icon_redface:
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Spotlight: Half price nobles

We frequently get asked questions such as "Why does world x have half priced nobles and we don't?" and "When does a world get half priced nobles enabled?".

Half priced nobles is a feature we usually enable on older worlds when we feel gameplay is getting stale. The idea of the change is that players won't have to wait as long to purchase noblemen so will be able to participate in attacks and tribe operations more.

We don't have a strict set of guidelines, but in general the following criteria must be met before a world will have the feature enabled:
Less than 1000 players left on the world
Players have to wait a long time to afford new noblemen.
In a world poll, more than 2/3rds of players must vote to enable it.

Currently worlds 1-10 and 12 have had this feature enabled. There are also a couple of exceptions: World 43 started with half priced nobles, and world 39 has it enabled shortly after the start.
Click to expand...



http://forum.tribalwars.net/showthread.php?t=189363
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Hmm I'm not too sure. (I'm biased though because it would benefit the bigger guys more than me :p)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
tommattox said:
Hmm I'm not too sure. (I'm biased though because it would benefit the bigger guys more than me :p)
Click to expand...

Not necessarily true as the number of packets required per noble for a 100 village player is relative to that of a player with 1000 villages. Assuming equal activity on the part of both players all this would do is accelerate the speed of village noblings for both players, in essence speeding up the game.
 
busamad

busamad

Contributing Poster
Reaction score
34
Vilja said:
Not necessarily true as the number of packets required per noble for a 100 village player is relative to that of a player with 1000 villages.
Click to expand...

I would say no as the 100 village player will have packets saved so the number per day able to save will be less.

Assuming equal activity on the part of both players all this would do is accelerate the speed of village noblings for both players, in essence speeding up the game.
Click to expand...

They do not have equal activity that is why some are larger than others.

Plus the gap would become greater as at present it is nobles slowing growth. If the supply of nobles increases. Then the number of nukes will be the slow down factor. A player with 1000 villages has more nukes so would grow even quicker.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
What part of "relative" and "assuming equal activity" did you not understand?

I will put this in simple terms then. Most equally active players will be able to educate the same number of nobles per day no matter the size of their accounts. The offset equalling this out between a 1000 village owner and a 100 village owner is the packet cost per noble. The field is still level for both players. It still costs the larger player 10 times as many packets as the smaller player. The difference being both players can educate twice as many nobles per day. Does this accelerate noblings? Yes it does and if you are a 100 village owner, after almost 2 years on this world, then you will be put out of your misery quicker, your addiction cured and will save you the cost of purchasing premium.

On other worlds I have found players that voted against half-priced nobles were in Wars they knew they would eventually lose anyway. Just prolonging the inevitable.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Vilja said:
On other worlds I have found players that voted against half-priced nobles were in Wars they knew they would eventually lose anyway. Just prolonging the inevitable.
Click to expand...

Thats why our first vote didn't pass on w10, our enemies (which equalled about half the worlds players) were rallied by their leaders to vote no, for those exact reasons. Although the reasoning they gave their member was "CTRL wants them, and we don't want what CTRL wants". Some of them were simply trying to piss us off.

We had to wait 6 months for another vote :icon_cry:
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Disco Biscuit said:
Thats why our first vote didn't pass on w10, our enemies (which equalled about half the worlds players) were rallied by their leaders to vote no, for those exact reasons. Although the reasoning they gave their member was "CTRL wants them, and we don't want what CTRL wants". Some of them were simply trying to piss us off.

We had to wait 6 months for another vote :icon_cry:
Click to expand...

I know. That was the world I was referring to. The Borg and DDB families voted no.
 

chrisparty

Guest
they have done a few worlds with constant noble prices -- or 1 packet nobles.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
that would be quite funny. i'd build like crazy and then send them all at an asylum player and see how many villages i could get :D
 

Caleb1705

Guest
King Muffin said:
that would be quite funny. i'd build like crazy and then send them all at an asylum player and see how many villages i could get :D
Click to expand...

I'd send them all to one village to make my noble stats look better. :icon_cool:
 

DeletedUser

Guest
greenless said:
a barb village? :icon_biggrin:

i want half price nobles. they benefit actives.
Click to expand...

I want half price pakets ... so i can take over teh world :icon_biggrin:

How do we get the Ing Poll started ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top