Update to Version 2.220 Discussion Thread

[DeletedUser38766]

i kind of like the idea of introducing heroes to sieges, whatever hero escorts the CS attack and starts siege successfully should "stick" to the siege and add his/her bonuses based on individual player hero lvl, that would be somewhat interesting and bring more strategy to the game

If flyers nukes are as easy to get as right now thanks to events then this would be very interesting yea. Tho if events were to change and flyer nukes harder to get, then i think it would be bad idea

 

[Lethal-Bacon]

If flyers nukes are as easy to get as right now thanks to events then this would be very interesting yea. Tho if events were to change and flyer nukes harder to get, then i think it would be bad idea

for me its not about flyer nukes, its about added strategy, because even if you have myth or want to gold on island olu, this can solve a lot of tiny issues and counter specific alliance plays, example... a lot of my teams went with a lot of LS early on so we can break majority if not all sieges and it has served us well, but this can be countered either by building a lot more birs or starting siege with zuretha or leonidas for example, if you know your enemies have a few or 1 big golder and you expect him to spend gold to kill your siege with on island olu/slings, plan the siege with hero that counters that, its all about planning, teamwork and execution, and while not overpowered because majority of heroes go to 10-20% this would add some strategy that wasnt there before.

 

[Shuri2060]

for me its not about flyer nukes, its about added strategy, because even if you have myth or want to gold on island olu, this can solve a lot of tiny issues and counter specific alliance plays, example... a lot of my teams went with a lot of LS early on so we can break majority if not all sieges and it has served us well, but this can be countered either by building a lot more birs or starting siege with zuretha or leonidas for example, if you know your enemies have a few or 1 big golder and you expect him to spend gold to kill your siege with on island olu/slings, plan the siege with hero that counters that, its all about planning, teamwork and execution, and while not overpowered because majority of heroes go to 10-20% this would add some strategy that wasnt there before.

I'd like to see heroes in sieges, but it's likely LS will become even weaker (strategically) because of this, and that's probably an unwanted side effect. Something to counter that would probably have to be looked into if they do this. I think we're happy with the balance of sea power in sieges atm, but less so with the land.

 

[DeletedUser38766]

Yea agree with Shuri and also i get you point Bacon . What i meant was that if for example flyer nuke wasn´t that easy to get anymore, i can visualize that most would send their CS with Perseus. I could imagine flyers becoming pretty weak and i believe that´s also pretty big side effect many don´twant to see.

 

[Lethal-Bacon]

I'd like to see heroes in sieges, but it's likely LS will become even weaker (strategically) because of this, and that's probably an unwanted side effect. Something to counter that would probably have to be looked into if they do this. I think we're happy with the balance of sea power in sieges atm, but less so with the land.

usually i would say yes, LS become weaker as the stage of the world progresses and only doable siege breaks are probably myth based, but i dont know if you play/played EN127, but thinking that a lot of future worlds will be temple endgame, these small temples are making LS quite broken, with 2 small temples granting you 10% attack boost each, it is very hard to defend against in this early stage of the world, not to mention other temples enabling people to build naval units cheaper and faster, in WW/Dom endgame, i totally agree with you on this, LS become weaker, but in temple endgame after small temples unlock, it gets fairly unbalanced, same thing can be said about myth, you can stack griff and blunt buffs and make them utterly OP.

 

[Shuri2060]

usually i would say yes, LS become weaker as the stage of the world progresses and only doable siege breaks are probably myth based, but i dont know if you play/played EN127, but thinking that a lot of future worlds will be temple endgame, these small temples are making LS quite broken, with 2 small temples granting you 10% attack boost each, it is very hard to defend against in this early stage of the world, not to mention other temples enabling people to build naval units cheaper and faster, in WW/Dom endgame, i totally agree with you on this, LS become weaker, but in temple endgame after small temples unlock, it gets fairly unbalanced, same thing can be said about myth, you can stack griff and blunt buffs and make them utterly OP.

Sounds like they need more DEF temples then? They do boost sieges, right?

 

[Lethal-Bacon]

Sounds like they need more DEF temples then? They do boost sieges, right?

i dont know if there are temples that boost naval defense or if that adds to the siege defense.

 

[Raydium88]

Sounds like they need more DEF temples then? They do boost sieges, right?

The increased 2% defense to all units small temple buff does apply to sieges. Is in fact one of the very few exceptions in terms of defensive effects that do.

 

[Hydna]

i dont know if there are temples that boost naval defense or if that adds to the siege defense.

There are a number of different defensive bonuses given by the temples and yes all of these temple def bonuses apply to sieges of both cities and temples. You will be able to see the value of extra def bonues if you play the temple worlds.

 

[Shuri2060]

Ah that's good to know. Don't think there are any bir temples - that would be a good balance to the LS temples

 

[Lethal-Bacon]

There are a number of different defensive bonuses given by the temples and yes all of these temple def bonuses apply to sieges of both cities and temples. You will be able to see the value of extra def bonues if you play the temple worlds.

thanks for explaining, i just went trough entire list of temples in 127 to find 3 temples offering this buff in entire world
" Increase defensive value of all units by 2% " and nothing about any naval defense boost, while there are a lot more of
" Increase offensive power of Light ships by 10% " and increase offensive power of all naval units/units by 3-6%"

pretty balanced

 

[Hydna]

thanks for explaining, i just went trough entire list of temples in 127 to find 3 temples offering this buff in entire world
" Increase defensive value of all units by 2% " and nothing about any naval defense boost, while there are a lot more of
" Increase offensive power of Light ships by 10% " and increase offensive power of all naval units/units by 3-6%"

pretty balanced

There is an offensive/defensive for Hydra. The thing is that the def is potentially far more powerful than offensive because it can be used in a siege and in stacking situations. The offensive bonuses can only be used for one city. Olympus is a wip so if you have feedback or suggestions please add this to the feedback thread.

 

[Blank Face]

"After reviewing community feedback, we have decided to disable morale during sieges on conquest worlds. This change will not apply for conquests on ghost towns."

I hope issa late foolish joke on the 1st April or smth like this.

Don't it??? No?

 

[Shuri2060]

There is an offensive/defensive for Hydra. The thing is that the def is potentially far more powerful than offensive because it can be used in a siege and in stacking situations. The offensive bonuses can only be used for one city. Olympus is a wip so if you have feedback or suggestions please add this to the feedback thread.

I disagree with this assessment. Both off and def bonuses affect all cities and units in them in the alliance.

If all LS of the breaking alliance are powered by 10% and all birs of the holding alliance powered by 10%, that essentially results in a 0 net boost altogether.

Yes, the LS nukes are from individual cities hitting a stack, but that was the case even if neither side had a boost. Applying a boost to both sides does not change this. Both sides would be powered by 10% in all attacks in this scenario.

This is like the difference between both sides having Ram, or both sides not having Ram. Ram is not far more powerful defensively than offensively like you suggest it would be.

(In actuality, the math may be slightly different because the boost is additive, not multiplicative, and there may be other boosts like spells in play, but the difference is negligible.)

The same can be said even if only one side has an OFF boost or DEF boost. The OFF boost affects all attacks as does the DEF boost. Neither can really be considered more powerful than the other.

 

[Blank Face]

Now it's evidently to see who loves to plays in a MRA.
You need to be so poor player if LMD can cause you any damage.

I don't understand your pleasant with this. It would kill small alliances in the way they would have not any possibility of fighting quite bigger alliances even being stronger, skilled and powerful than MRA.

How tf 10 players would be capable of fighting 100 players?? No way!!! What is more important, the fact that one of the main distinguishing feature of Conquest it's you can play like that. The system where online and skill are most important things and where it all plays crucial role. Now, it is dead.

Great news for MRA players.
Bad news for real and good players....

 

[Blank Face]

Fantastic update

It seems you are just rofling .

 

[Lethal-Bacon]

@Blank Face why do you care, you spend entire world in VM either way, LMD's cant hurt you

 

[Darth Akula]

How tf 10 players would be capable of fighting 100 players?? No way!!!

What a myth this is.... And I've seen worse ratios.

 

[DeletedUser41523]

How tf 10 players would be capable of fighting 100 players?? No way!!!

*Laughs in Booty Warrior Cult*

 

[Blank Face]

@Blank Face why do you care, you spend entire world in VM either way, LMD's cant hurt you

Hi, good joke. Glad to see you are making some progress, buddy.