different type of world

Discussion in 'World Drink! (W10)' started by greenwalker, Jan 19, 2014.

Share This Page

  1. greenwalker

    greenwalker Guest

    You guys should create a world where you can not take barbs...You can loot for resources and send nobles but it will not lower loyalty I bet you get tons of players to join!
    I would.

    Much more intense player vs player always.

    Anyone agree?
     
  2. Firequeen

    Firequeen Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2012
    Messages:
    383
    Likes Received:
    6
    Actually no.
    Well it might work with the bigger player base on .net but here I think it would just makes the worlds even smaller. Especially if churches are involved as with W9 for example.
     
  3. jesseiam2

    jesseiam2 Guest

    This has already been done, see W9. It was not that popular.
     
  4. greenwalker

    greenwalker Guest

    Bleh You added churches? and sorry I should have done my research then... lol


    I never did like churches... I wonder why it was not so popular... lol all the small players were like NOOOO I cant noble barbs? D:
     
  5. Firequeen

    Firequeen Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2012
    Messages:
    383
    Likes Received:
    6
    Problem is that to have room to grow tribes need to be pretty scattered. Otherwise people get choked out by tribemates.
    A lot of competition for villages and hard to move to a new location to get space. This is made even worse when you add churches into the mix.
    Maybe reduced numbers of barbs or keeping them small so they are a less appealing option would help.
     
  6. greenwalker

    greenwalker Guest

    Yes that may work, maybe a max of 1k points
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 19, 2014
  7. greenwalker

    greenwalker Guest

    the reason w9 was unsuccessful in my opinion is it had churches and no barb nobling, churches make everyone want to cluster but no barbs makes that hard and also nobles need to still be able to attack barbarian villages they just have to have no effect...

    those things are why the world was hated

    also for no barb nobling rules player villages need to be closer together... Just slightly because Jumping across the world could be difficult
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 25, 2014
  8. jhop

    jhop Guest

    Lower barb max points would be good. I played .net with lower barbs and we rarely took them. I quit when it was my only option. On W10, I don't like taking them, but it seems to be a necessary evil.
     
  9. Ice Cold

    Ice Cold New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    Messages:
    347
    Likes Received:
    6
    a no barb nobling world is unpopular because there are a few scenarios that are totally out of your hands. regardless of your precautions and abilities, you can totally get screwed.

    here are a few examples...

    you start a world, go for a crazy sprint and farm non stop. being one of the 1st with a full nuke and train you go in for the kill
    to someone beside you... at the sight of your train they restart because they have no troops. your loyalty is missed by 1 and you can't send another noble after cuz its barb. now you search even farther for a target... but you cleared your 15x15, whats next???

    same situation as the 1st, you go crazy and sprint hard. instead of risking loosing the nobles, you decide to clear a village 1st.
    once again at the sight of your nuke he either restarts, and you get stuck clear a big D barb to gain nothing but lost troops
    or..
    your nuke lands, kills all his troops, then he restarts.
    either way you are dead in the water in this situation too. no troops, 4 nobles and no target. have fun.

    this type of world makes almost no sense. barb nobling is bad in many players eyes, but is something noobs do
    to grow villages for the bigger players. its also something bigger players do to cluster up in areas where barb noblers clustered up
    tight to them. removing this, like moral and other settings seriously throws off a balance that tw needs.
     
  10. greenwalker

    greenwalker Guest

    fair enough, it just stinks in later stages of the game because it prolongs the fight for so long because instead of fighting your opponent everyone just nobles barbs and no progress or fighting is actually accomplished.
     
  11. Sweeney

    Sweeney Royal Guardian W17

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2010
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    32
    I agree that barbs should be less points, but removing the ability to take them is not a good idea IMO.
     
  12. greenwalker

    greenwalker Guest

    well anyway to discourage the taking of barbs is fine by me :p
     
  13. Lakadaem

    Lakadaem New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2013
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think a world with shrinking barbs would be ideal. So all barbs eventually expand or shrink to a 500 point level.

    This way the above scenarios Ice Cold mentioned would be okay for this, as it would take a couple of weeks for the barbs to shrink from say 3000 points to 500 points.

    It would also mean if players delete or barb in late game it wouldn't be such a massive hit for the tribe. The barbs could be left to shrink down to 500 points.

    It would make nobling barbs less likely, and to be honest more than likely more about strategical locations than just laziness. It would also keep farming active, as 500 points, with shaping, can be worthwhile for farming.

    I think this was done before, but not fully sure.
     
  14. greenwalker

    greenwalker Guest

    I also like that idea