Forums

Which is still OK if you're that well defended t/m wise.

Edit: Also, I'm using 60 as a high-risk, extreme side of the spectrum case. Even a ml 55, 50 or even 45 is really good with their old t/m defense potential damage output.

It's not ok for thieves to have less than 50% citz but its ok for temps? Hmmm....

Sanzi a couple things, templars have 45% homes for the extra space, i think its ok if they go over 50% then.

Also, thieves are not well defended t/m wise. Even with like 40 tpa and 25% Chs, when they op, their thieves are out and then they could die to other thieves OR their CHs could go bye-bye and then the mages have fun (One of our victim's in our war vs 32 would serve the perfect example). Templars don't send out any of their t/m defense at all.

That makes them safer as well.

Edit: can't compare thieves and templars

Edit2: Thieves vulnerable as ANYTHING to Jura. But I don't need to remind you of that

Personally I think the templars should be changed a little bit. However I was told that the thieves were changed because of a hypothetical situation where there are 1 or 2 attackers that can grab you when you run 35+tpa. After 1 or 2 grabs a thief would stand no chance according to my source. Now what if there are 1 or 2 attackers near a ml 60 templar? Same situation as long as an alliance has some thieves.

I believe 25% is too high, but also 0% might be be too low, it would be interesting to test this in dev to come up with a good number. My main problem with age changes is the fact that large thieves are favored over small thieves and it seems the reason they are changed contradicts why templars are changed.

I think it is interesting that there was a thread on templars in game talk and it seems those suggestions were not taken very seriously.

I also find it interesting in that very same thread 3 weeks ago, sonix said he disagreed with eliminating the 25% thieve protection. If I understand the post correctly

Personally in terms of templars I really liked halcs idea of making the Cleric /1 and increasing the efficency of the def spec.

To summarize the posts from that topic it seems most just want some way to be able to decrease templar ml more efficiently possibly through increased BC losses, or something similar to Jura, etc. Definetly something that would have to be tested on Dev first

I also understand a lot of people are trolling on this topic

I think everyone understands that templars are slightly OP right now

You're right Gonzo, I still do disagree with removing the 25% thief protection. My vote was for reducing clerics back to 2/1 while keeping the thief protection, something similar to Halc's idea.

However, here i'm not debating why they're thief protection specifically was dropped but why templars overall needed a nerf.



Once again, you can't compare thieves and templars. Thieves send their thief defense out. That makes a HUGE difference. If templars sent out their ML when casting spells, then I would agree with you. But sending your thieves out makes you very very vulnerable either to CH/acad destruction or just death by other thieves. DW and Sanzo should both know this since both of them died to us because they sent their thieves out. Same with someone from 32.

Also, it's ok for larger mages to be favored more than smaller mages but its not ok for larger thieves to be favored more than smaller thieves?

oh i was first to complain about the scaling of mages. I complained to bolle at least 3 ages ago and made a sugesstion that it was too powerful and gives big tribes too much of an advantage

And again from that earlier thread I think everyone agreed templars needed a nerf.

They were. I quote:



Unfortunately for you Templar folks I was alone on that one, so now you'll have to make do with zero thief def

Don't like it? Send me a PM and come join dev to back me up next time



EDIT:



Sonix agrees with you on this one. Unfortunately for you both I don't. Come join Dev and shout me down next time

I was of course talking about a templar that 's dumb enough to build only 30% homes.

I shouldn't be talking in here today ...

That's ok we'll call it hardar's extreme suicide build. that +15% guilds . Disclaimer: Requires 24/7 activity.

Running 45% homes is not a bonus sonix, just means more are destroyed when opped

LOL....I rather tear down some acads and change to mines, then to release 120K+ clerics at 300cr each..... 120K clerics is 36 million....and that is without soldier cost, every time we go to growth mode after a war.....

Sorry side topic: Is undead really useful?
You guys are focusing only on over powered-races, but some races eventually not playable? (there is only one undead player with 500acre)

Undead can only gain land size by grabbing from others (similar to dragon), but his overall attack lose to: Dragon, Uruk Hai, Rept Hai, Balrog, Viking.

Unless an undead is running full suicide attack for a grab, or he won't be able to break well defended tribe.

The good trait is the 25% mana/thieves point burned:)
Btw, is pestilence still working on undead? Previously it seems unable to spread to others after self casted and made an attack.

Curious...

Undeads are actually pretty efficient with their:

8/0
0/8
6/7

In terms of units, it's better than oleg hai's and high elves' units. They are arguably similar to balrogs' efficiency (maybe a bit better) who have half has many citizens as other races so:

15/0 becomes 7.5/0
0/15 becomes 0/7.5
13/13 becomes 6.5/6.5

I don't think UD are bad, just slow.

Other attacker can go explore until certain size, then start boosting their offence.

Undead is even worse than dragon (dragon has auto explore race spell) and has weaker offence.

8 offence point will not break a well defended mage/ thief at early stage. So it will be a big problem if no similar size target available, while other races can explore to counter this problem.

Btw, its not slow, but very very slow. Lol..

Old nazguls used to be the best attackers imo and they cudn't explore either. 8/0 can break things. repties only have 8/3s. high elves have 7/0s.

I do agree they are very very slow but if they pick up they can be good. There were a couple 15-20k UDs in KP I believe with these new changes.

Sonix you don't get my point.
If there are similar size targets in range, undead could be fed up.
If not, it will take days or weeks until a 'breakable' target in size range.

While other races can explore during this period.

That would be quite boring while waiting for targets and eventually lose the fun of the game.

Or maybe it's only happen on me. Could use some pro advise from good UD

when does the age start?

what is the meaning of life?

why do plants fight zombies?

changes will be upload in around 24 hours

Because zombies are vegetation yet move - and plants think that's cheating.

Please stay on topic. I'm sure robokop will announce perfectly in time when the changes will be uploaded and when the next age starts.

EDIT: see what I mean?

sorry, I should probably be sacked as “forum mod” too

ty :D

and still, all changes keep this game a pure t/m game.
why?
look at top 25 tribes. 80% T/M's.
why?
attacking people is the basis of this game. or was.
isn't attacking people more fun then bunkering?
don't we want that?
i don't get it.