Half priced nobles... Something to look forward to?

[DeletedUser]

You don't have to imagine.... I am sure we will see that day come when they introduce the "half-price-noble" exception to W16. :icon_eek:

An evil rule, but I don't want my rather firm opinion about this drag the thread off-topic :icon_wink: Might be worth a seperate topic though...

Well MK sparked the idea for a new thread thanks to seagryfn's post in the c2 lshrv war topic.

As we know the older worlds have started to introduce the half priced packets. Personally I was against the notion at first but playing with it I have come to enjoy it in w2.

Either way this topic would be coming up soon I would assume anyway so lets go ahead and discuss what people think on the topic.

 

[DeletedUser]

im not sure whether i like this idea or not.... it would mean less saving to grab a load of villages but at the same time would it actually make the world more enjoyable? does anyone know when this will possibly be introduced?

 

[DeletedUser54400]

I think the impact in general will not be too severe, it will mostly help with internal/barb/small player nobling.
The amount of nobles available on the world will increase dramaticly however in war conquers are still more limited by the amount of nukes one can use and their rebuild time.
The C2/LSHRV stats clearly shows this, even with more resources being able to be spent on rebuilding troops the time factor for rebuilding them does not change.

One question tho, i presume half priced packages mean that your current stored amount doubles up ( as they keep track of the amount of resources stored aswell ) rather then screwing over players who have stored a large amount in the academy and rewarding those with full warehouses?

 

[DeletedUser45021]

W9 has half priced nobles, and it's brilliant

 

[DeletedUser]

Half priced nobles :icon_eek:

I would be interested in this as it would help me to remove some dust from my carpets :icon_twisted:

although I guess that before I actually cast my vote I would like to see the way it works like Qoffee said. However I am gussing that the price to produce nobles just goes from 28.000 30.000 25.000 to 14.000 15.000 12.500 or something like that so as not to affect the stored packets in the academy although if it were planned one might be wise to save packets rather then produce nobles depending on the time frame.

Of course if you couldn't wait to noble a village perhaps using existing nobles might be a wiser idea then producing new ones if it were to happen within a month.

lastly I think you would see a massive increase in the fake noble trains using real nobles adding to the strategy of the game but until then we shall see

 

[DeletedUser]

I'm against this, although I don't think it would have too much of a change. Last time I checked I had over 13k packets simply because I don't use my nobles fast enough.

The only time I played with half price packets was on W39, where it was introduced shortly after players started training nobles. There all stored and used packets were doubled. I doubt they'd do the same thing on this world though.

 

[DeletedUser]

Doubling packets stored is probably all we can look forward to, if we vote for half priced nobles that is.

 

[DeletedUser]

Ok just so everyone understands it here is what the staff gave to w2 when they were deciding.

Survey

Half priced Nobles Vote!

Basically the vote is for half priced packets, meaning a packet will cost half of the current price. A village with maxed resources will be able to store 26 instead of 13 packets. This does not affect how many packets it costs for the actual noble.
This vote will be open for the next 5 days. If this goes through as a YES, with a majority vote then we will implement on June 1st. We don't want anyone to be surprised when they store packets on the 30th and then realize that they couldl have waited two days and stored twice as much.
If this does go through, please plan accordingly, we will make a final announcement in 5 days with your decision!


Yes I want half priced packets
197
84.19% No I want to keep full price packets
37
15.81% Votes cast: 234

So no it will not double what is in your stored resources already.

What will happen is that the number of packets you can store per village doubles once it is initiated.

In the current state of w16 you are suppose to be able to build one noble per day with the resources you can store each day. Meaning you can noble one village per day. The only change would be that that increases from 1 to 2. Which would in turn slightly speed up things if you are one of those people short on packets but have plenty of offense.

 

[Dopeas]

I fully support it, I've been waiting for it honestly.

More nobles would make the game funner; more noble fakes in wars, less inactives in all tribes (since we can noble their villages faster), and less barbarians (since some people will have an over population of nobles.)

Of course, there's some cons to it too, but I like the pros more

 

[DeletedUser]

I'm against this, although I don't think it would have too much of a change. Last time I checked I had over 13k packets simply because I don't use my nobles fast enough.

The only time I played with half price packets was on W39, where it was introduced shortly after players started training nobles. There all stored and used packets were doubled. I doubt they'd do the same thing on this world though.

and used packets? that i think might be a bit over the top for this world. that would mean Seagryfn would be able to make over 300 nobles on the day it changes.

i think the best idea would be just to half the price of the nobles not double the amount of packets you produce. oh and i am for that to by the way

 

[DeletedUser]

I likle the slow speed and slow action of this world. I am personally against it. It could be also considered like less strategy because you would have more nobles to use... I think that the nobleman creation rate is balanced with the troops needed for it if you plan well your things. Having 2x more nobles would only make the life easier for players nobling villages from inactive and barbarians as already stated. I prefer fighting for villages than nobling inactives ( personal opinion).

Maybe the fake noble train would become more popular but... you know it cost you 4 packets only for a fake noble train...

So basically I agree with your statement qoffee. (I think however that the current number of packages would stay the same but I may not be right.)

 

[DeletedUser78416]

I dont like it...it would basically be the same thing if we simply increased the worlds speed. We could accrue resources faster and thus produce more packets to store. This defeats the purpose of people loving this world because it is slower than others. This was suppose to be the 'skill' world remember. The world where alot of top players joined because it eliminated other gifts, such as growing barbs and the higher speeds.

Since mid August I have avg. 1.74 vills a day (150 vills in roughly 86 days, +/-). I started with 32,000 packets and now have 18K and some change. I had it as low as 13k, but through further storing, the amount never really has gotten to the point where Id worry about running out.

Players just need to balance their resources better, much like balancing ones finances...then half priced packets would not be needed.

And by balance I mean management...when to store, when to mass recruit.

And I have farmed a total of Zero times since taking this account.

my .02, and I second my own motion.

Case closed, k thanks bye.

 

[DeletedUser]

Apologies, I haven't had time to read the whole thread, I literally have two minutes.

I asked Morthy the other day if World 18 could get 1/2 Price Nobles and I think he said it wasn't developed enough. It's more developed than 16 so i'd think it's even less likely that we get 1/2 Price Nobles here.

Apologies if any of that doesn't make sence

 

[DeletedUser54400]

I dont like it...it would basically be the same thing if we simply increased the worlds speed. We could accrue resources faster and thus produce more packets to store. This defeats the purpose of people loving this world because it is slower than others. This was suppose to be the 'skill' world remember. The world where alot of top players joined because it eliminated other gifts, such as growing barbs and the higher speeds.

Bbuilding still go equally slow, resources still gather equally slow, troops dont train any fast nor do they travel fasster. So it basicly something completely different.

Since mid August I have avg. 1.74 vills a day (150 vills in roughly 86 days, +/-). I started with 32,000 packets and now have 18K and some change. I had it as low as 13k, but through further storing, the amount never really has gotten to the point where Id worry about running out.

Players just need to balance their resources better, much like balancing ones finances...then half priced packets would not be needed.

And by balance I mean management...when to store, when to mass recruit.

And I have farmed a total of Zero times since taking this account.

my .02, and I second my own motion.

Case closed, k thanks bye.

Your growth rate alone should show you that you are in a vastly exceptional situation and are thus not dealing with any of the issues that a normal player on this world faces regarding packages and nobles. The fastest growing player in the server barely manages to stay above 1.0 village/per day

 

[DeletedUser29719]

Rules should constantly change so that we would get rid of more people and it would be great to keep playing with only ~10 year old kids and big egos.

 

[DeletedUser]

This would be bad for my tribe, need I say more.

 

[DeletedUser75807]

This would be bad for my tribe, need I say more.

I agree with you on this point.

 

[DeletedUser78416]

Bbuilding still go equally slow, resources still gather equally slow, troops dont train any fast nor do they travel fasster. So it basicly something completely different.



Your growth rate alone should show you that you are in a vastly exceptional situation and are thus not dealing with any of the issues that a normal player on this world faces regarding packages and nobles. The fastest growing player in the server barely manages to stay above 1.0 village/per day

Thats because those peeps are suffering from the norym complex, as I like to call it. He says he strives for daily and constant growth and doesnt like spurts.

Myself on the other hand, I have no problems with taking in bunches (20-30 at a time) then rebuilding and storing packets over the next week or two, so on and so forth.

If Seagrfyn were to stop nobling for 1-2 months and do nothing but farm and store packets...she would have a surplus of stored resources. Then it would be up to her to not spend more than she can comfortably take in...which is why growth spurts are my preferred choice.

Once a player finds themselves in the low packet situation, combined with the ever pressing urge to constantly noble, it's hard to not drain the packets dry.

Besides, taking in bunches or spurts allows some free time to do other things, such as resource balancing, village builds, browse forums, spam as much as possible (oh wait, that's just me )

Preference is all it comes down to. That and the patience to be able to store. I have a system that works for me and one that is going to allow me to catch and pass Norym!!

I issued the challenge to him, even e-slapped him with my gauntlet. :icon_razz:

 

[MichielK]

The quote in the first post of this thread is a good hint about my feelings on half-priced nobles, but just to be 100% clear: half-priced nobles are a terrible idea.

There's a lot of discussion above about the influence it will have on game mechanics and how that affects the world, but my objections are rather more fundamental...matters of principle, really:

1) Changing the rules mid-game hurts gameplay
You're playing a chess match, and at move 20 your rook can suddenly go diagonal as well. You're playing tennis, and after the first set it's announced that a set will now consist of 3 games. You're watching a football match, and at halftime the referees decide that a touchdown is now worth 12 points.

Does this help the game? Make it more fair? More interesting to play or watch?

Half-priced nobles are no different from the examples above. We started the game under a specific set of rules, we obviously liked those rules since we're still playing, and changing the rules mid-game is a ridiculous risk to take.

2) It sets a dangerous precedent
Half-priced nobles seems like a big change, but it also means that the door is open for more changes. Why not give HC twice their attack and defense ratings? Or let scouts lower loyalty by 5 points? Make nobles move 3 times as fast?

These examples may sound extreme, but half-priced nobles is also an extreme change and there's no guarantee that that'll be the only change. Once we start tinkering with game mechanics, all bets are off.

3) It dumbs down the game
W16 has 309,955 villages, which means that over 300,000 players started or restarted on this world. Out of that massive amount, only 1000 of us are left. We've all proven that we could survive and prosper while 99.7% of the competition is already dead...quite an achievement, and something we should all be proud of.

Do we really want to ruin that sense of pride and achievement by making the game easier? I'm strongly against dumbing the game down...I like that it's difficult, since it gives me a better feeling if I succeed.



Bottom line: a vote for half-priced nobles is a vote for more randomness, less fair gameplay, and dumbing the game down. The only people who would vote for that are the people who lack a spine and can't cut it under normal circumstances, and they should be deeply ashamed of themselves.

 

[AxlTheCat]

Time based morale, which I don't think had been thought of when w16 started, was implemented after the server was 1 year old. Changing morale from 33% to 51% for big players hitting small players was a big change.

While doubling nobling rate would be a change, I don't see any huge changes in game play, it would still take 20 days to build a nuke. There would just be more inactive eating.