1

(24 Antworten, geschrieben in Pub)

Tyranicus schrieb:

To fight Frodo's clan and inhibit its growth, the strategy and tactics that I envision can and will contribute to burn out and loss of player base.

- 1

2

(13 Antworten, geschrieben in General chat)

Saw575478 schrieb:

icons or pictures of troops on a map you go to with all the villages on it and color coded by clan like doluseek but when you scroll over troops you see the destination and where from

Ohhhh.  No.  I'd not like that at all.  I don't want people to see where my guys are or where they are going or coming from.

3

(13 Antworten, geschrieben in General chat)

Saw575478 schrieb:

what I want the most is a map where you could see troop movements

I want zombie ninjas or dragons or an honor system that is simple to use
I have no idea how to make troop movements... moving.  What do you have in mind specifically?

4

(5 Antworten, geschrieben in Feedback)

Bowser schrieb:

Can it be done have a global forum that is linked with dolumar

Not easily, no.  And I mean, "Really, REALLY not easily"

5

(1 Antworten, geschrieben in Bug archive)

Clicking on the "Underworld" option under the "?" dropdown menu brings about unfortunate things:

Fatal error: Uncaught exception 'Neuron_Exceptions_DataNotFound' with message 'Could not find mission.' in /var/www/speed/dolumar/php/Dolumar/Underworld/Mappers/MissionMapper.php:27 Stack trace: #0 /var/www/speed/underworld.php(26): Dolumar_Underworld_Mappers_MissionMapper::getFromId('1') #1 {main} thrown in /var/www/speed/dolumar/php/Dolumar/Underworld/Mappers/MissionMapper.php on line 27

6

(6 Antworten, geschrieben in Feedback)

Lendogg schrieb:

Maybe even instead of assasinating a wizrd you could steal spells?

+ 1 vote

7

(13 Antworten, geschrieben in General chat)

Saw575478 schrieb:

I agree that gold would be good for that Hellikin but there would need to be more uses for gold first or else everyone would have tons of useless gold...

Yes

8

(24 Antworten, geschrieben in Pub)

In response to this, and after a bit of discussion, we've come up with the idea that:

frodo schrieb:

3 days limit after pulling runes. This will be for villages not the player. So if you hit my main and pull runes, 3 day cooling off period for that village applies but not to my outpost. You can hit me there as well but once runes are pulled, 3 days cooling off period applies.

No Honor loss attacks. Do not attack other main villages that will create honor loss.

Outposts - They will be open game. Larger villages can attack any outpost and take the honor loss. Once runes are taken, 3 day cooling off period applies

And:

Hellikin schrieb:

Once a village makes contact (in any form) with another village in terms of attacks, only that village can attack for 24 hours (when runes are lost, 3 day cooldown begins).  To simplify: Once a village is appears in the clan logs as a target, nobody else in the clan can hit it for 24 hours, even if no runes lost.

The addition is this:
Once a player reappears in the clan logs as an attacker (clan logs are indisputable shared information) then both counters reset:
* The 3 day rune take cooldown ends (resets)
* The 24 hour targeting restriction ends (resets)

Note: the player must appear in the logs.  Marching to attack and actually making contact are two different things.  One appears in the logs, the other does not.

9

(6 Antworten, geschrieben in Feedback)

jlaholton schrieb:

would it be possible to make it to where you can only support players in your clan?? when you poison water, everybody knows you just send your troops to support an inactive player that's close. this just makes the thieves weaker. smile

My opposition to this is for a single reason: yes, it is a war game... but it is also an economics game... as well as a political science game.  I'm always happy to subsidize a proxy war with troops, weapons, resources, whatever.  Now with trading in equipment limited to clan members only (I'm fine with that limitation taken alone) I'm afraid of what further limitations may bring.

I think a better option exists:
1) Cheapen thief operations while extending their duration (halve cost, double length)
2) Why poison when you can steal?  Instead of poison water supply, what if the amount lost is continuously transferred to the casting village?

10

(13 Antworten, geschrieben in General chat)

EvE Online uses a concept called sovereignty.  Basically, you hold an area and it becomes yours over time.  How do we define the area?  How do we control the area? And, what do we get for control of the area?

Saw suggests resources.  Personally, I think only one resource: Gold.  It's a levy (tax) that a sovereign clan earns.

11

(1 Antworten, geschrieben in Feedback)

Bowser schrieb:

I wish there was a server where it had the rules and same troops stats for each race from stable1. From around April 2009 when i started. None of the new weapons or armor. None of the newer spells. Also the old honor and rune taking system. It would be the only server I would play.

I miss the old honor system.  It was easy to use (fast) and very forgiving for newbies.

The current honor system has some very bad problems and is difficult to work with

While it does allow players to farm rune banks, it also means that a player has a VERY strong incentive not to buy runes once a single outpost has been constructed.  I hold the position that a player should not be penalized for supporting the game.  Of course these runes should count, but only after they have been used (i.e. a return to score-based honor calculations).

An equally strong incentive not to upgrade their castle once a single outpost has been constructed also exists.  An outpost vs a main with any upgrades means that the main is going to lose runes.

12

(24 Antworten, geschrieben in Pub)

I think we need an additional item with regards to: this and this

Under this system it's possible for a player to be hit by more than one village repeatedly until runes are drawn.  This is clearly less than optimal (i.e. Wolfie, Cerv, and I machine gun jla until one of us draws runes, then we stop attacking him for 3 days and move to the next target).

My proposal is this:
What if there is an "Exclusive Target" rule that runs for 24 hours.  Once a village makes contact (in any form) with another village in terms of attacks, only that village can attack for 24 hours (when runes are lost, 3 day cooldown begins).  To simplify: Once a village is appears in the clan logs as a target, nobody else in the clan can hit it for 24 hours, even if no runes lost.

13

(24 Antworten, geschrieben in Pub)

DoomPope schrieb:

And for me, its little things that get me

That would be an aggravating factor, yes.

14

(24 Antworten, geschrieben in Pub)

Wolfieke schrieb:

This game is getting to be more like work then fun.

I agree

15

(24 Antworten, geschrieben in Pub)

nathanstupid schrieb:

while im not crazy about honour loss attacks no honour loss attacks only would ruin the game for me that means theres only like 3 or 4 villages i could attack so it would be completely obvious who im attacking

Welcome to the top of the leaderboard.  Building an Outpost means you can attack everyone again.

Chaos schrieb:

but giving the victim resources to scout again? Are you serious? That is like paying someone for their goods after robbing them.

Exactly...almost.  You're only paying for 1 rune set, even though you might have taken 40 runes.  This was suggested because we'd like to prevent players feeling overwhelmed or completely helpless.  We are trying to avoid losing any more players.  After an attack, it's possible that the attacked player is somewhat stuck for a while - especially if certain buildings are now gone.  This at least lets them get a rune scout in.

16

(24 Antworten, geschrieben in Pub)

I think a 72 hour (3 day) cooldown regardless of rune amount taken is a good, simple rule.  Why? 
1) It gives the target the chance to rebuild somewhat and pull in a few more runes
2) It keeps people from having to worry about being online 24/7 which eventually will lead to burnout

As a matter of good sportsmanship, maybe the attacking village's clan can ship the total amount required for the losing village's next rune search (assuming their W/H has not been obliterated) within 8 hours of battle completion.

I'd also like to see no honor loss attacks - ever.  Not even retaliation. Why no retaliation?  Because honor loss is visible from the top down, not bottom up.  If Frodo were to attack Tyranicus, he has no way of knowing exactly how much honor Ty is going to lose.  Yes, this is an extreme example, Frodo should know better; but still, when the slot counts are close, there is no way to know (i.e. one player is a high 9 slot and the other is a low 7).
With the exception of outposts, if you lose runes to a player who you would lose honor fighting against, you deserve to lose them.  Therefor, I'd exclude outposts from the "no honor loss" rule.  But that would be my only exception.

____________________
Edit: Stuff about the outposts

17

(2 Antworten, geschrieben in Bug report)

Yeah - you cannot edit posts with BBCodes in them for some reason.

18

(17 Antworten, geschrieben in Questions)

DoomPope schrieb:
Hellikin schrieb:

I'm just mixed up by how my OP casting on itself has a lower probability than it does when it casts on my main.

Your own wizards from the non-casting tower count against you.

I can't see how that syncs up with this: http://en.forum.dolumar.com/post/6171/#p6171
In my OP, exactly 10% of runes were invested in wiz towers

I can cast R1 from a weak tower in my main on my main or on my OP with 90% probability.

Now after multiple upgrades to other buildings in my OP, my probability to succeed on a cast of R1 is up to 82% from 80%

19

(17 Antworten, geschrieben in Questions)

I'm just mixed up by how my OP casting on itself has a lower probability than it does when it casts on my main.

20

(3 Antworten, geschrieben in Bug archive)

Nice - did not know that

21

(17 Antworten, geschrieben in Questions)

Chaos, because they are independent events (always 1/6), the form is: 1/6+1/6*5/6 = 11/36.  You are not including the 5 out of 6 times where the first roll is not a 6

It is a good game when you can argue probability theory
_______________
Edit: Clarification

22

(17 Antworten, geschrieben in Questions)

I don't think that's an appropriate test for two reasons
1) each cast is an independent event.  Here's an example, the odds of rolling 2 sixes in dice is 11/36, right?   But that is considering that you are rolling together and view them together.  However, the odds of rolling a six the 1st time is 1/6 while the odds of rolling another six with the 2nd roll is also 1/6.  But yes, together it is 11/36.
2) the variable being generated follows the uniform distribution
__________________
Edit: typo

Edit2: To clarify: the odds of success/failure are always the same, regardless of what has happened on the cast before

23

(17 Antworten, geschrieben in Questions)

OK, something is not making sense to me.  My outpost casting Rain1 on itself is an 80% probability.  My outpost casting Rain1 on my main is a 90% probability

24

(5 Antworten, geschrieben in Bug archive)

Blastboy schrieb:

This has nothing to do with native language. Americans don't know the difference either.\n\nBesides, this is the bug report forum, so what is wrong with reporting a bug I found in the game?

Nothing - good catch

25

(3 Antworten, geschrieben in Bug archive)

Thanks boss

________________
Edit: Woot!  Post # 500